In the fall of 2004, the Dover Area School Board in Dover, Pennsylvania passed a policy requiring ninth-grade biology teachers to read a statement about intelligent design (ID) before beginning teaching on evolution. Discovery Institute, the major organization supportive of intelligent design, opposed the Dover policy, although it defended the right of teachers and students to voluntarily discuss intelligent design. Seeking to overturn the policy, the ACLU eventually filed suit against the school district On December 20, 2005, federal district court. Judge John E. Jones, III  ruled that the Dover policy was unconstitutional. Judge Jones’s decision was never appealed, and so it is only legally binding in the judicial district in which it was filed (the Middle District of Pennsylvania). That has not stopped some from trying to use Jones’s decision to censor discussions over evolution in classrooms across America. Others have claimed that Jones’s decision decisively refuted intelligent design as a scientific theory.

However, ten years later the debate over the adequacy of modern evolutionary theory has only become more robust. And there is a growing body of scientific evidence, backed up by peer-reviewed research, supporting the theory that that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

The Information Enigma

Download Your Free Book and Key Resources about the Case

Traipsing into Evolution: Intelligent Design and the Kitzmiller v. Dover Decision is a 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 decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent evidence, and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of intelligent design. You will also get these free resources:

• “Intelligent Design Will Survive Kitzmiller v. Dover,” from Montana Law Review
• Michael Behe’s response “Whether Intelligent Design Is Science: A Response to the Opinion of the Court in Kitzmiller vs Dover Area School District”
• “A Comparison of Judge Jones’ Opinion in Kitzmiller v. Dover with Plaintiffs’ Proposed ‘Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law’”
• “Darwin’s Failed Predictions: A Response to Selected Online Materials of PBS-NOVA’s Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial Documentary”
• “Does the Kitzmiller v. Dover Ruling Show that Intelligent Design is Academically Substandard?” by Casey Luskin