Re: Dover: Witnesses withdrawing

--- janice matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:

> At 10:57 AM 10/26/2005, George Murphy wrote:
> >----- Original Message ----- From: "Ted Davis"
> <tdavis@messiah.edu>
> >To: <asa@calvin.edu>; <pimvanmeurs@yahoo.com>
> >Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 8:39 AM
> >Subject: Re: Dover: Witnesses withdrawing
> >
> >
> >>Why did Warren Nord withdraw? Does anyone know?
> Was it simply that he
> >>no longer wanted to associate himself with a
> losing case? Nord is a
> >>genuinely independent thinker on this issue (and
> some others). I'm sorry
> >>that he
> >>won't be testifying. ......"
>
> ### ".....Further discussion reveals differences
> between the two
> organizations concerning the withdrawal of defense
> witnesses for the
> Kitzmiller vs Dover trial currently taking place in
> Federal District Court
> in Harrisburg, PA. (See NCSE's Dover page, at
> (<http://www2.ncseweb.org/wp/>this url)for briefs,
> transcripts and other
> information on this trial.) ..."
>

Yes, the Thomas Moore Law Center (TMLC) and the
Discovery Institute (DI) do not seem to be on such
friendly terms lately.
Yet, it's the work by the DI which may have confused
the TMLC to believe that there is a legal foundation
to teach ID in schools and that ID is actual a
science. When the TMLC obtained expert witness reports
to support their claims, they must have been quite
upset when the DI withdrew many of the 'top
witnesses'.
But the DI seems to have regretted their moves as
well. I believe the main reason for the DI to withdraw
the witnesses may have been the belief that the case
was too muddled by direct mentions of Christ etc
during the board meetings. In other words, they are
hoping to have the Dover case rejected based on
motivations by the board rather than on the
unconstitutionality of ID based on ID being
scientifically vacuous. Now that the latter has become
a real possibility, they tried to reintroduce their
witnesses' expert reports via an Amicus brief,
depriving the plaintiffs' lawyers from cross-examining
these witnesses.
Seems to me that the TMLC made a poor judgement to
rely on works by the DI which suggested that ID was a
science and could be constitutionally taught in
schools. The DI overreached itself by withdrawing
their witnesses, and is now faced with the real
possibility of a ruling that ID is not scientific.

I imagine he TMLC must be quite frustrated with how
their case is being undermined by an organization they
may have considered their ally.

The Dover case is full of surprises. PT contributor Ed
brayton has uncovered some fascinating details on the
'peer review' of Behe's Black Box book and will
present his findings anytime soon.
Received on Wed Oct 26 19:18:17 2005