Responses to Dover Ruling

Traipsing Into Evolution: Intelligent Design and the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Decision (DI Press, 2006)

Traipsing into Evolution is a book-length critique of federal Judge John E. Jones's decision in the Kitzmiller v. Dover case. In this concise yet comprehensive response, Discovery Institute scholars and attorneys show how Judge Jones's Kitzmiller decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent evidence, and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of intelligent design.

• Setting the Record Straight about Discovery Institute's Role in the Dover School District Case
• Statement by attorney Seth L. Cooper Concerning Discovery Institute and the Decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Board Intelligent Design Case
• A Comparison of Judge Jones' Opinion in Kitzmiller v. Dover with Plaintiffs' Proposed "Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law"
• PBS, Darwin & Dover: An Interview with Phillip Johnson
• Top Questions and Answers about Intelligent Design
• Questions and Answers about Discovery Institute
• Text of Dover Intelligent Design Statement
• ACLU Demands and Dover Designs by Joe Manzari and Seth Cooper
• AP Cites Discovery Institute's Opposition to Dover School Board Policy
• Over 700 Scientists Convinced by New Scientific Evidence That Darwinian Evolution is Deficient
• Should we Teach Scientific Criticisms of Neo-Darwinism? Many Authorities say YES!
• Articles Advocating Teaching the Controversy
  
  
  Discovery Institute News Releases
  
  Judges' Copying of ACLU "Highly Frowned Upon" by Courts According to Legal Scholars"Masterful" Federal Ruling on Intelligent Design Was Copied from ACLUDover Intelligent Design Decision Criticized as a Futile Attempt to Censor Science Education
  Discovery Institute
  December 13, 2006
  
  
  Discovery Institute
  December 12, 2006
  
  
  Discovery Institute
  December 20, 2005
  
  Discovery Institute Tells Dover Judge: Teaching About Intelligent Design is Constitutional
  October 17, 2005
  
  Dover Trial Witness Plays Misleading Word Games In Effort to Redefine Intelligent Design
  October 6, 2005
  
  
  October 5, 2005
  
  85 Scientists Join Together in Urging Court to Protect Academic Freedom and Not Limit Research into Intelligent Design Theory
  October 4, 2005
  
  Imposter Design Theory On Trial In Dover Case, Real Intelligent Design Still Not Discussed in Court
  September 28, 2005
  
  In Dover Trial, ACLU's Expert Witness Mischaracterizes Intelligent Design
  September 27, 2005
  
  Dover Intelligent Design Trial Showcases ACLU's "Orwellian Efforts" to Stifle Scientific Inquiry"September 21, 2005
  
  Discovery Institute's Position on Dover, PA "Intelligent Design" Case
  It's about Free Speech, Not Church and State
  September 15, 2005
  
  Discovery Calls Dover Evolution Policy Misguided, Calls For its Withdrawal
  December 14, 2004
  
  Pennsylvania School District Considers Supplemental Textbook Supportive of Intelligent Design
  Discovery Institute continues to recommend fully teaching Darwinian evolution, including scientific challenges to the theory
  October 6, 2004
  
  
  Amicus Briefs
  
  Brief of Amici Curiae Biologists And Other Scientists In support of Defendants: The Nature of Science is not a Question to be Decided by Courts
  October 4, 2005
  
  Brief of Amicus Curiae, The Discovery Institute
  Legal brief filed by Discovery Institute about secular purposes for teaching about the scientific theory of intelligent design. [Revised version]
  October 31, 2005
  
  Discovery Amicus Brief Appendix A
  Documentation showing the scientific theory of intelligent design makes no claims about the identity or nature of the intelligent cause responsible for life. [Revised version]
  October 31, 2005
  
  Brief of Amicus Curiae Foundation for Thought and Ethics: Teaching about intelligent design out of Of Pandas and People does not establish religion. See also Appendices A-D
  November 4, 2005
  
  Brief of Amici Curiae Discovery Institute and Foundation for Thought and Ethics: Reply to Plaintiffs' Response to Amicus Briefs.
  December 12, 2005
  
  
  Testimony
  
  Testimony of Dr. Michael Behe, expert witness for the defense Afternoon session, day two
  October 18, 2005
  
  Testimony of Dr. Michael Behe, expert witness for the defense Morning session, day two
  October 18, 2005
  
  Testimony of Dr. Michael Behe, expert witness for the defense Afternoon session, day one
  October 17, 2005
  
  Testimony of Dr. Michael Behe, expert witness for the defense Morning session, day one (beginning of Behe testimony)
  October 17, 2005
  
  Dover Expert Witness Report CSC Senior Fellow William Dembski's expert witness report for the Dover ID case
  
  Dover Expert Witness Rebuttal CSC Senior Fellow William Dembski's rebuttal of the reports by expert witnesses on the other side of the Dover ID case, specifically, Barbara Forrest, Robert Pennock, John Haught, Kevin Padian, and Kenneth Miller.
  
  Testimony and cross examination of Dr. Robert Pennock, Plaintiff's witness
  September 28, 2005
  
  Cross examination of Dr. Kenneth Miller, Plaintiff's witness Day two
  September 27, 2005
  
  Cross examination of Dr. Kenneth Miller, Plaintiff's witness
  September 26, 2005
  
  Opening statements from Kitzmiller v. Dover.
  September 26, 2005In Intelligent Design Trial Take Barbara Forrest's Testimony With A "Shaker-Full" of Salt, Warns Discovery Institute