Senior Fellow, Dr. Michael Behe, testified as an expert witness in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Board intelligent design trial in 2005. Judge Jones issued a ruling against the school board and in so doing asserted that intelligent design was not based on science. Dr. Behe disagrees, and here we publish his direct responses to many claims of the Court.
Dr. Behe writes:
The Court’s reasoning in section E-4 is premised on: a cramped view of science; the conflation of intelligent design with creationism; the incapacity to distinguish the implications of a theory from the theory itself; a failure to differentiate evolution from Darwinism; and strawman arguments against ID. The Court has accepted the most tendentious and shopworn excuses for Darwinism with great charity and impatiently dismissed arguments for design.
All of that is regrettable, but in the end does not impact the realities of biology, which are not amenable to adjudication. On December 21, 2005, as before, the cell is run by amazingly complex, functional machinery that in any other context would immediately be recognized as designed. On December 21, 2005, as before, there are no non-design explanations for the molecular machinery of life, only wishful speculations and Just-So stories.
Click here to learn more about the brand new book Traipsing Into Evolution: Intelligent Design and the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Decision, the first book critiquing Judge Jones’ Dover decision, by David K. DeWolf, John G. West, Casey Luskin, and Jonathan Witt. Published by Discovery Institute Press.
For more information on the Dover trial visit our Dover Trial Information Page.