Was the modern intelligent design (ID) movement "over after Dover," as many ID critics hoped it would be? Quite the opposite. In the last two decades ID has flourished as a scientific research program and continues to gain momentum in both academia and the public square. On today's ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid concludes his conversation with geologist, legal scholar, and Dover trial expert Dr. Casey Luskin. In this segment, marking the 20th anniversary of the Kitzmiller vs. Dover trial of 2005, the pair examine the outcome of the Dover trial, in which a judge ruled that intelligent design was a religious viewpoint, not science, and therefore unconstitutional to teach in public schools. Luskin explains why the Dover ruling was highly flawed and unreliable and how it misrepresented the definition of science and the arguments of ID proponents. Luskin also reveals how the ID movement has flourished in the twenty years since Dover. This is Part 2 of a two-part conversation. Read More ›
Over After Dover. That was the hopeful mantra of many critics of intelligent design (ID) after the Kitzmiller vs. Dover trial in 2005. They were hoping a federal judge could issue a decree from on high that would stop the ID movement cold in its tracks and neo-Darwinism could go back to being unquestioned, unchallenged orthodoxy. But was it over after Dover? Not even close. On this ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid marks the 20th anniversary of the Dover trial by beginning a two-part conversation with geologist, legal scholar, and Dover trial expert Dr. Casey Luskin. Luskin takes us back to 2005 to give us his unique perspective on the events that led to the Dover trial, his own personal experiences of the case, and the position the Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture held on the issues at stake. This is Part 1 of a two-part conversation. Read More ›
