It has now been two years since the pseudoscience Intelligent Design got its rectum handed to it by Judge John E. Jones III in the Kitzmiller v Dover case. Each year, it has become a science blogging tradition to highlight the effect that this monumental test case has had on the public image and political strategies of ID. The scientific status of ID has remained unchanged since its inception, namely, empty. What the court case did was turn the tables on the politics of the Discovery Institute and its “Design Proponents,” revealing in a structured evidence-based format just how far from science they really were. Among the things it revealed were:

  • The religious motivations behind and purpose of introducing Intelligent Design into classrooms.
  • The factually inaccurate claims made by ID about the evidence for evolution.
  • The absence of evidence against evolution - this mythical evidence is one of their talking points.
  • The damage to science that ID would cause through relaxing the rules of evidence, logical inference, and the abandonment of the requirement that science be testable. This was most exemplified by Michael Behe’s (a design proponent) admission that their “new” definition of a scientific theory would also include Astrology.
  • The utter unwillingness of many design proponents to testify in court - something that they claimed evolutionary biologists were afraid of themselves.
  • Finally, as if all of this wasn’t damning enough - Intelligent Design was demonstrated to be merely a re-labeling of creationism in 1987 after a Supreme Court case had ruled that “creation science” in the classroom was unconstitutional. In that year, every instance of the words “creationist” and “creationism” in their high-school ID textbook were replaced with “Intelligent Design” and “Design Proponent.” The definitions were exactly the same. In one instance, “creationists” was improperly edited to become “cdesign proponentsists” - a breathtaking transitional fossil between creationism and intelligent design.

You can hear more about the case from Nick Matzke in episode 65 of the Mindcast.
“Breathtaking” was the word of the day for December 20, 2005, as Judge Jones ruled that the school board members that put ID in the classrooms had displayed “breathtaking inanity.” ID was ruled as not science but religion, and not constitutional to be taught in high school science classrooms.

The ruling was not national - only an appeal to the Supreme Court could have made it that - but the school board was voted out and the new pro-science school board had no desire to appeal the ruling, so the ruling only applies to the jurisdiction of the court that heard it. However, the ruling sent a chilling effect across the nation, and helped reduce or put an end to the efforts then underway to inject ID creationism into high school science classrooms.

Two years later, ID is dwindling, but not gone. Efforts to dilute evolution education or introduce non-scientific “alternatives” like ID still happen. Right now, Florida and Texas are competing to see who can trash science the most, and you can read more about these developments at The Panda’s Thumb.

Now, to enjoy this day, coincidentally also the Winter Solstice this year, I have a special treat for you. At After the Bar Closes, Amadan posted an anniversary tune to celebrate the Kitzmiller v Dover court case. A Kitzmas Karol, if you will. It was supposed to be sung to the tune of “I am the very model of a Modern Major General” by Gilbert and Sullivan. You may recognize the tune as the same that Tom Lehrer used for The Elements song. Here’s Amadan’s version:

“I am the very model of a C-Design Proponentsist” by Amadan

I am the very model of a c-design-proponentsist
The diametric opposite of all that is materialist
My engineering cert allows me call myself a scientist -
We won’t discuss those classes in Biology I might have missed

I work in a diploma mill I call a university
And there I struggle long and hard to teach the controversity
I welcome all opinions notwithstanding their diversity
I just reject the fact-based ones as atheist perversity

He just rejects the fact-based ones as atheist perversity
He just rejects the fact-based ones as atheist perversity
He just rejects the fact-based ones as goddam pervertersity

My publication record is quite pre-dispen-sensationalist
I regularly top the polls of books that are salvationist
Applause in the reviews keeps copies flying off the bookstore shelf
I couldn’t be more pleased if I had written the reviews myself

He couldn’t be more pleased if he had written the reviews himself
He wishes Amazon would keep his IP numbers to itself

When I go up for tenure I’ll submit my publication list
And if they ask for science then I’ll scream “Discriminationist!”
Religion has no place within the quest for natural knowledge
At least until I am the one who’s put in charge of [the] college

I’m waiting for the day in court when Darwin meets his Waterloo
[And] though I might find that testifying isn’t what I ought to do
I know that what’s in Genesis is strictly and completely true
It’s just a shame it’s stuck in a six-thousand-year-long peer review

He knows that what’s in Genesis is strictly and completely true
He knows that what’s in Genesis is strictly and completely true
He wishes that the IRS would let him see his research through

I claim that Dover came about because the judge was activist
I dazzle congregations with my jargon that’s distractivist
I never answer awkward questions even if you do insist
I really am the model of a c-design-proponentsist

He never answers awkward questions even if you do insist
He really is the model of a c-design-proponentsist

If only someone would sing it for everyone? Well here’s my Kitzmas gift to the science blogosphere: “I am the very model of a C-Design Proponentsist” sung by Karl J. Mogel.

Sing along, and send it to a Cdesign Proponentsist near you!

Lastly, I would like to suggest one thing that will make everyone’s holiday season so much more pleasant, and send a message to the IDers out there. After the KvD decision went down, William Dembski, a cdesign proponentsist (who happens to be a main part of the above song) decided to quit blogging. He later resumed, but, symbolically this showed everyone how much the case had affected the ID movement. I propose that in recognition of this hiatus, and the irreparable tailspin it has gotten caught up in, that science bloggers everywhere act as if ID didn’t exist, starting today. Don’t visit their websites, nor write posts about their activities, or even respond to news about them for a period of time, I suggest two weeks. From the 20th of December to the 4th of January, when Dembski resumed blogging. (Yes he officially quit on the 26th, however, 6 days seemed to be how long it took him to read the decision. It was all over on the 20th!)
What would the world be like without ID? Apparently, according to the founder of the Intelligent Design movement, Philip Johnson, there still is no Intelligent Design:

I also don’t think that there is really a theory of intelligent design at the present time to propose as a comparable alternative to the Darwinian theory, which is, whatever errors it might contain, a fully worked out scheme. There is no intelligent design theory that’s comparable. Working out a positive theory is the job of the scientific people that we have affiliated with the movement. Some of them are quite convinced that it’s doable, but that’s for them to prove…No product is ready for competition in the educational world.

Parents are often the last to admit that their children are dead. Yet, there are many people who still believe that ID is gaining interest - often supporting that claim by looking at their website stats.
How many of their website hits are from us checking on them to respond to claim after claim? How much do they thrive off of the negative attention they stir up? How much better would our holiday seasons be if we didn’t read a single post about ID? What do you think? Spread the word!

And I hope you liked my singing!

Merry Kitzmas, to all, and to all a good fortnight.