Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Publisher of Pandas textbook offers “The Untold Story of Dover”

arroba Email

From Foundation for Thought and Ethics on the 2005 court case. Here:

Although significant quantities of the book have lost all market value, it’s never too late to set the record straight. Gathered evidence in the form of original records, documents, and confirming points of reference from a variety of public and private records tells a very different story. This documented information contradicts, and indeed, fully refutes the central narrative of the Kitzmiller story. It demonstrates that, from the outset, FTE was seeking to determine if intelligence played a role in bringing about living forms. In testing its ideas and searching for the most accurate, descriptive, and appropriate terminology to characterize the role of intelligence in biology, FTE considered many terms, none of which broke with scientific convention.

Contrary to Judge Jones’ ruling that Pandas was originally intended to advocate creationism, FTE in fact agreed with previous court rulings against teaching actual creationism in public schools. For example, within the 30-day appeal period immediately following the 1982 district court ruling against the teaching of creationism in McLean v. Arkansas, Charles Thaxton and I met with Arkansas Attorney General Steve Clark in his offices in Little Rock, urging him not to appeal the verdict. Simply put, this was because FTE agreed that “creation science” promoted a religious viewpoint that was not appropriate for use in public schools, and that future court rulings would no doubt concur that it is not legal to advocate in public schools. As the list of 42 reviewers and 8 editors and contributors in the front of Pandas might suggest, we believed that partisans on both sides of the worldview divide might find an academic and educational solution to be far superior to any legislative one. More.

Chromosomal Fusion Zombie! - Ian Juby - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWsoColtSYk bornagain77
@tjguy, 10 Thank you. The reason I didn't find many articles debunking chromosome fusion is because I always avoided any source that was not neutral, but I am really frustrated to note that there seems to be no neutral source of information when it comes to defending ID. selvaRajan
SevaRajan, Here is a recent article about the chromosomal fusion argument that you should be aware of: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/arj/v6/n1/human-chromosome-fusion tjguy
I got a quick response from FTE regarding the missing appendices. They say they will be online in a day or two. sagebrush gardener
OT: per Richard Weikart:
Richard Weikart: My essay, "The Role of Darwinism in Nazi Racial Thought," just came out in _German Studies Review_. I've posted it to my website at: http://www.csustan.edu/history/faculty/weikart/darwinism-in-nazi-racial-thought.pdf
It is surprising that I could not find any corroborative paper elsewhere.
here you go:
Why The Chromosomal Fusion Argument Doesn’t Wash - Jonathan M - February 2011 https://uncommondesc.wpengine.com/intelligent-design/why-the-chromosomal-fusion-argument-doesnt-wash/ Here is a good summary of why the chromosome 2 argument does not wash https://uncommondesc.wpengine.com/intelligent-design/spring-it-on-em-and-watch-the-fur-fly/#comment-431951 It's Cherry Picking Season - July 24, 2012 Excerpt (Guy walks into a bar and thinks he is a chimp): I try to outline all the functions of telomeric repeats, but my friend tells me that I am getting off the subject. He wants to me to focus on the ITSs, the tracks of the hexamer TTAGGG that reside within chromosome arms or around the centromere, not at the ends. I tell him that I was just coming to that topic. The story, you see, is that in the lineage leading up (or down, I forget which) to chimps and humans, a fusion of chromosome ends occurred -- two telomeres became stuck together, the DNA was stitched together, and now we find the remnants of this event on the inside of chromosomes. And to be fair, I concede at this point that the 2q13 ITS site shared by chimps and humans can be considered a synapomorphy, a five-dollar cladistic term meaning a genetic marker that the two species share. As this is said, it is apparent that the countenance of my acquaintance lightens a bit only to darken a second later. For I follow up by saying that of all the known ITSs, and there are many in the genomes of chimps and humans, as well as mice and rats and cows..., the 2q13 ITS is the only one that can be associated with an evolutionary breakpoint or fusion. The other ITSs, I hasten to add, do not square up with chromosomal breakpoints in primates (Farré M, Ponsà M, Bosch M. 2009, "Interstitial telomeric sequences (ITSs) are not located at the exact evolutionary breakpoints in primates," Cytogenetic and Genome Research 124(2): 128-131.). In brief, to hone in on the 2q13 ITS as being typical of what we see in the human and chimp genomes seems almost like cherry-picking data. Most are not DNA scars in the way they have been portrayed. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/07/its_cherry_pick_1062491.html etc.. etc.. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1enllGchcY4Thz0xWFG8Rj8Y0bddOcBdIzKeoY1XxSqs/edit
You also claimed:
The other issues of the trial can be explained.
And exactly how are the other issues in the trial of the Darwinists being very disingenuous to the evidence explained? bornagain77
@bornagain77, 2 Thank you very much for the references. My main concern was about human chromosome 2 fusion site. The other issues of the trail can be explained. I have read http://creation.com/chromosome-2-fusion-1 and companion paper 2. (http://creation.com/chromosome-2-fusion-2). Fusion site not aligning with Chimp Chromosome 2A and the inferred presence of non-active Centromere (not actual presence)are clinching evidence of 'non-fusion'. Of course presence of motifs through out random sites on either side of 'fusion' too lends credence to non-fusion. It is surprising that I could not find any corroborative paper elsewhere. I hope this paper is made available widely. I am curious if the issue of replacing 'Creationism' with 'Intelligent Design' in Panda books was explained. selvaRajan
Good question, LisaM. I emailed them to ask about the missing appendices. I'll post here if I get a response. sagebrush gardener
Great essay, but it references a bunch of "Appendices", and I only see Appendix C at the end of the PDF, is there a link to the others somewhere and I just missed it? LisaM
I never closely followed the case as it really was useful just as a skirmism encounter. The establishment is for evolution and only full war will bring down the state censorship. The Judge was incompetent about scientific matters from what I read. The purpose of ID or YEC is to teach or defend the truth on origins. Its purpose is not to teach creationism but simply the evidence leads in that direction. If it concludes God/Genesis is true and evolution/no Creator is not true then tough snowflakes.!! If the JUdge is saying conclusions of research leading to creationist conclusions is ILLEGAL. Then creationism is illegal according to the state. Further the state is saying creationism is WRONG about conclusions in origin matters. Wrong because they touch on religious conclusions. So certain religious conclusions are WRONG. A opinion of the state that it has no authority and even is illegal to assert. Bring on another case and smarter Judges. lets say a jury of our peers. Peer review of the facts please. Its stupid to say creationism is illegal in the constitution made by the old Yankee and Southern Protestant peoples. Robert Byers
selvaRajan as to:
It was an embarrassment when precursor to flagella was shown,
Hmmm, is that so???
"One fact in favour of the flagellum-first view is that bacteria would have needed propulsion before they needed T3SSs, which are used to attack cells that evolved later than bacteria. Also, flagella are found in a more diverse range of bacterial species than T3SSs. ‘The most parsimonious explanation is that the T3SS arose later," Howard Ochman - Biochemist - New Scientist (Feb 16, 2008)
If anything evolved from anything, the T3SS 'devolved' from the flagellum
The Non-Flagellar Type III Secretion System (T3SS) Evolved from the Bacterial Flagellum and Diversified into Host-Cell Adapted Systems - September 2012 - Institut Pasteur, Paris, France http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1002983 Engineering at Its Finest: Bacterial Chemotaxis and Signal Transduction - JonathanM - September 2011 Excerpt: The bacterial flagellum represents not just a problem of irreducible complexity. Rather, the problem extends far deeper than that. What we are now observing is the existence of irreducibly complex systems within irreducibly complex systems. How random mutations, coupled with natural selection, could have assembled such a finely set-up system is a question to which I defy any Darwinist to give a sensible answer. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/09/engineering_at_its_finest_bact050911.html
as to:
the chromosome from chimps that fused to form humans was identified
The chromosome 2 fusion model of human evolution—part 1: re-evaluating the evidence - Jerry Bergman and Jeffrey Tomkins Conclusion: The purportedly overwhelming DNA evidence for a fusion event involving two primate chromosomes to form human chromosome 2 does not exist, even without the aid of new analyses. In this report, our review of only the reported data by evolutionary scientists shows that the sequence features encompassing the purported chromosome-2 fusion site are far too ambiguous to infer a fusion event. In addition to a lack of DNA sequence data for a head-to-head chromosomal fusion, there also exists a decided paucity of data to indicate a cryptic centromere. In a companion paper (part 2) to this, we report the results of additional data analyses using a variety of bioinformatic tools and publicly available DNA sequence resources that further refute the hypothetical chromosome fusion model. http://creation.com/chromosome-2-fusion-1 As well, the primary piece of evidence, at the Dover trial, trying to establish chimp human ancestry from SNP (Single Nuecleotide Polymorphism) evidence was overturned: Dover Revisited: With Beta-Globin Pseudogene Now Found to Be Functional, an Icon of the “Junk DNA” Argument Bites the Dust - Casey Luskin - April 23, 2013 http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/04/an_icon_of_the_071421.html
OOOPS, oh well how about,,,
and of course, the lawyer’s showman tactics of stacking books about immunology research near Dr.Behe was perhaps the most embarrassing event.
Yet when that stack of books were gone over by a respected immunologist, it was found that is was a,,,
"A Masterful Feat of Courtroom Deception": Immunologist Donald Ewert on Dover Trial - audio http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/player/web/2010-12-20T15_01_03-08_00 In this following podcast, Casey Luskin interviews microbiologist and immunologist Donald Ewert about his previous work as associate editor for the journal Development and Comparitive Immunology, where he realized that the papers published were comparative studies that had nothing to do with evolution at all. What Does Evolution Have to Do With Immunology? Not Much - April 2011 http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2011-04-06T11_39_03-07_00
You then state,,
IMHO it is best that the subject is left alone.
For who? The only ones who would be embarrassed by more light being shed on the facts of Dover are Darwinists, for it would expose how thoroughly disingenuous they were with the evidence. The deception (literature bluff), from neo-Darwinists at Dover, did not stop with immunology;
The NCSE, Judge Jones, and Bluffs About the Origin of New Functional Genetic Information – Casey Luskin – March 2010 http://www.discovery.org/a/14251
supplemental note: The main evidences used by Darwinists for falsely claiming that material (i.e. Darwinian) processes can generate genetic information are thoroughly refuted in the following article:
Hopeless Matzke -David Berlinski & Tyler Hampton August 18, 2013 http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/08/hopeless_matzke075631.html
I think the Dover case was the lowest point in ID history. It was an embarrassment when precursor to flagella was shown, the chromosome from chimps that fused to form humans was identified and of course, the lawyer's showman tactics of stacking books about immunology research near Dr.Behe was perhaps the most embarrassing event. IMHO it is best that the subject is left alone. selvaRajan

Leave a Reply