A clean sweep in Dover

Posted 9 November 2005 by Mike Dunford

The York Dispatch is reporting that eight out of the eight incumbent school board members in Dover have lost their bids for re-election to pro-evolution candidates. Wes already gave the preliminary results in an earlier Panda's Thumb post. What I'd like to do is talk about the implications a bit. Continue reading (at The Questionable Authority)

31 Comments

JonBuck · 9 November 2005

Now, the question is:

Can we repeat this success in Kansas? The only way that ID will go down to final defeat is at the voting booth. They're the ones who decided to make this a political battle. That the Dover school board were tossed out on their ears in a heavily Republican county shows that grassroots campaigns work.

Mike Walker · 9 November 2005

It will probably hinge on if we can prove that the Kansas BoE's redefinition of science was religiously motivated.

Of course, we all *know* that it was, but proving it in a court of law will be tougher than the trouncing just heaped up on the Dover wingnuts.

'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank · 9 November 2005

It will probably hinge on if we can prove that the Kansas BoE's redefinition of science was religiously motivated. Of course, we all *know* that it was, but proving it in a court of law will be tougher than the trouncing just heaped up on the Dover wingnuts.

Not *much* tougher, though: http://www.geocities.com/lflank/kansas.html

Aagcobb · 9 November 2005

It also helps that the creationists on the Kansas school board couldn't prevent themselves from saying things like:

"At some point in time, if you compare evolution and the Bible, you have to decide which one you believe. That's the bottom line."
-- Kansas State Board of Education Chair Steve Abrams

harry eaton · 9 November 2005

While the previous board members may not be personally liabile for acting in their official capacity, might it be true that a couple of them have lost that shield by comitting perjury in their testimony?

If so, it would be fitting for the new school board to sue them should the litigation costs fall on the school district. That would be a just result, and a far more interesting end to the saga of Waterloo in Dover.

'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank · 9 November 2005

It also helps that the creationists on the Kansas school board couldn't prevent themselves from saying things like: "At some point in time, if you compare evolution and the Bible, you have to decide which one you believe. That's the bottom line." --- Kansas State Board of Education Chair Steve Abrams

Indeed, this is what I love most about IDers. Let them talk long enough, and they shoot themselves in the head, every time. The fatal flaw with ID (or whatever else they decide to call it in the future) as a strategy is that it depends on its success for an impossible thing ---- every one of its advocates MUST, absolutely MUST, shut their Bibles, shut their mouths, and refrain from preaching to all and sundry about their religious opinions. They can't do it. They don't WANT to do it. None of them can go ten minutes without preaching their Bible Babble. Not even Dembski, Meyer and all the rest. It's why they will never win.

EmmaPeel · 9 November 2005

IMO the lesson is: Sue the Kansas Board of Ed to get them under oath!

If it wasn't for the lawsuit and the Dover school board's necessary squirming & dissembling on the witness stand, the election never would have penetrated the consciousness of most of the voters.

Since the DI is openly praising the Kansas decision as an example of the kind of approach they want school boards to take, they're the logical people to have to take the stand in Kansas. I'd love to see Stephen Meyer asked if he's the one who wrote the long harangues against materialism that were on the CRSC's website for the first 2 years of its existence.

Shadowram · 9 November 2005

You know it really stuns me, or maybe I'm flabbergasted might be a better term, that a School board any school board can change the definition of science, or any other school of thought. Like since they can change what Science is, can't they also change what History is? Or get rid of English as the main language altogether and replace it with Spanish if they so felt like it. Something just seems really wrong about the power they wield.

I thought a School board's job was to make sure kids are in schools, they have the proper schools and to maintain educational standards or definitions dictated by higher authority in fields of thought. Like Scientist, Historians, Economists.

How can a School Board simply throw out or change definitions in fields such as History, Biology , Social Studies, Astronomy, etc, just because they feel like it? That is way to much power for an elected body that does not even require that they even know what they are talking about. Only on what they "feel" about a subject.

Reason I say this is because; they control the minds and education of the future Leaders, Scientist, etc. Their actions alone can shape the future of the world. I would like that power to be in the hands of the real authorities in each school of thought. And the School boards main goal is to uphold it, not change it.

Yes I'm a scared puppy, I scared for my 4 year old daughter and the world she will have to live in.

Shadowram

Engineer-Poet, FCD, ΔΠΓ · 10 November 2005

ID ... depends on its success for an impossible thing ------ every one of its advocates MUST, absolutely MUST, shut their Bibles, shut their mouths, and refrain from preaching to all and sundry about their religious opinions.
— Lenny Flank

That's only true unless and until the SCOTUS is packed with judges who decide that separation of church and state is passé, and theocracy is all well and good with them.

Engineer-Poet, FCD, ΔΠΓ · 10 November 2005

I should have said "only true so long as the SCOTUS is not...."

'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank · 10 November 2005

ID ... depends on its success for an impossible thing ------ every one of its advocates MUST, absolutely MUST, shut their Bibles, shut their mouths, and refrain from preaching to all and sundry about their religious opinions.

That's only true unless and until the SCOTUS is packed with judges who decide that separation of church and state is passÃ©, and theocracy is all well and good with them.

Yes indeed. But then, at that point, "evolution" and "science education" will be the very LEAST of our problems. We'll be far too busy preventing the Reconstructionists from doing exactly what they say they will do ---- stoning all the heretics and infidels to death. Me, I do not think that the Supreme Court will do the fundies any favors. I don't think they WANT the fundies to be able to implement their program, nor do the Republicans. Theocracy is bad for business. But, if the Court DOES enable theocracy, then at that point, I think we as a people are justified in doing whatever it takes to restore democracy and the rule of constitutional law. Take that how you will.

Shadowram · 10 November 2005

Humm I think there might be a problem brewing with us Evo's in how we deal with the ID folks. If we are not careful we will turn them into martyrs. This is an interesting story by NPR. They even interview Eugenie Scott and Ken Miller. The attacks on ID'ers are not good, and "looks" like us Evos are trying to stifle open thought and discussion. We all know this is not true, we are just trying to keep these crack pots out of our schools, but perception is what counts.

Listing to the Audio portion, the link is on this page. It is a very interesting story.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5007508

Shadowram

'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank · 10 November 2005

Humm I think there might be a problem brewing with us Evo's in how we deal with the ID folks. If we are not careful we will turn them into martyrs. This is an interesting story by NPR. They even interview Eugenie Scott and Ken Miller. The attacks on ID'ers are not good, and "looks" like us Evos are trying to stifle open thought and discussion. We all know this is not true, we are just trying to keep these crack pots out of our schools, but perception is what counts.

Let 'em whine. (shrug)

Sir_Toejam · 10 November 2005

but perception is what counts

not quite. perception is heavily influenced by spin. don't concentrate on the few articles that paint scientists as intolerant of debate, and forget about the thousands that show scientific debate in a more accurate light. also remember that NPR is currently under VERY heavy pressure from several congressional representatives for having a too "liberal" bias, so they need to publish "alternative" (read right wing) viewpoints from time to time. Dover shows us that when the facts are correctly published by the media, the public can and will respond. I agree with Lenny, there is no reason to kow-tow to idiots in the media who choose to spin public perception for ratings, or simply because they are too lazy to do the work themselves. there are plenty of journalists out there who do a fine job of presenting the issues without having to placate bad writers who don't know their *ss from their elbows.

Shadowram · 10 November 2005

Thank you both Rev and Toejam, I know I am getting worked up about this whole issue, but truth be known, I do not think I have ever been so passionate about any topic in my life. Generally when world issues come up, I'm like ya that is bad ..they really need to do something about. I may donate to a cause or voice my opinion once in a while, but I will not lose sleep over it. This Evo vs ID thing has got me all riled up. I just can't believe the things the IDers are saying, and they really believe what they are saying. I equate the ID'ers to the Jehovah Witnesses that come banging on my door trying to convert me. Problem is if the ID'ers win, they will change America, they will change our way of life. I am just a Joe nobody, but in this case I will fight this attack on Science with everything I can muster. If it means posting in blogs, getting out the vote..anything to do my part.

Shadowram
http://www.myspace.com/shadowram

Russell · 10 November 2005

I equate the ID'ers to the Jehovah Witnesses that come banging on my door trying to convert me.

That's really not fair to the JW's. They might be annoying, and subscribe to an alternate reality, but I see no reason to impugn their honesty and integrity by equating them with this lot.

Sir_Toejam · 10 November 2005

I do not think I have ever been so passionate about any topic in my life

yup. i hear that. so does lenny, I'm sure. I have found that getting involved in your local school district is an excellent way to really help out with this issue. many educators are desperate for someone to hash these issues out with and get more information on how to deal with creationist arguments, and some just want to learn more about evolutionary theory in general. Again, i think Dover provides an excellent case for the impact of local involvement in curing this ID "disease". I think you will find participation with your local school district to be much more productive than posting here, if a bit more difficult and time consuming. I hope the message of local involvment becomes a strong denumout on PT once the rulings in Dover become finalized.

Shadowram · 10 November 2005

Point well taken Russell, I can't think of another group to bring about an analogy. I have nothing againt JWs, well except that they always seem to pick the most inconvenient times to knock on the door.
Much like the ID'ers do when US high school education is ranked like number 9 in the world. I read this somewhere, does anyone the true stats?. So these people want to lower our rank in education, by adding ID into the classroom at this time. It's crazy

Shadowram
http://www.myspace.com/shadowram

Shadowram · 11 November 2005

"The people in Dover have spoken ... even though I don't think it's a mandate," Thompson said.
Ya right. ALL of the incumbents got voted out, if that is not a mandate, I do not know what is. It's all about the spin..

Sir_Toejam is right. I as a parent need to voice my opinion now in the school boards,get involved, it is my duty, even though my daughter is only 4 y/o and going to a private Christian K 4 class, next year she will be going into the public school system. We all need to do our part, and especially the Scientist. They cannot take for granted that just because they know the truth, it does not mean the lay person..like myself, know what is really going on. Its time for the Ivory tower to come down from there well earned perch and inform the masses. It is also their duty

http://www.newsfactor.com/news/A-Vote-for-Evolution-in-Pennsylvania/story.xhtml?story_id=022000Y7QYNG

shadowram
http://www.myspace.com/shadowram

Sir_Toejam · 11 November 2005

couldn't agree with you more.

two things i would point out tho:

Scientists at Universities really ARE extremely busy most of the time.

they have to divide their time between:

-teaching
-graduate students
-research
-funding

and it takes most of a 70 hour plus workweek for many (not to say we don't enjoy a lot of it).

Still, I think that if more parents groups approached their universities and requested assistance in dealing with educational issues that have arisen at the k-12 level in their own areas, it certainly wouldn't hurt. If you can get together with already organized educational groups and present a formal request to your local university, I tend to think you would get some help.

I know at Berkeley, these kinds of concerns are what founded UC Berkeley's online evolution education site:

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/a/2004/03/29/MNGQV5SIDC1.DTL

http://evolution.berkeley.edu

It takes dedication and effort to get what you want, so keep up your interest and I'm sure it will pay off.

cheers

Shadowram · 12 November 2005

The good thing about Pat Robertson's comments about Dover and the self inflicted wrath of God, is that its world wide news, and if you now look at the stories, they are tying Pat Robertson with Intelligent Design. I would love to be a fly on the wall at DI's emergency crisis management meeting going on this weekend. It will be interesting to see how they spin themselves out of this one. Someone where once said "Leave these fundamentalists alone and they will dig their own grave"

I am starting to feel much better about Evo coming out on top.

Shadowram
http://www.myspace.com/shadowram

George Sota · 13 November 2005

As a 75 yr. old US citizen and combat veteran, I never heard anyone in a foxhole praying to Darwin!
The creator of the universe gave us a choice of free will to choose what we want to call it evolution or creation.
Man was given the ability to change.
Those denying the creator, for a better word, call the ability to change, evolution. Those that deny the creator will themselves be denied by the creator!
Those denying the creator for a want of a better word

George Sota · 13 November 2005

Some one deleter the end of my last sentence in message 56965 which is:
Those denying the creator for a wnat of a better word call this change, evolution!

roger Tang · 13 November 2005

As a 75 yr. old US citizen and combat veteran,

I dobut this.

Just another garden variety troll trying to trot out the usual false dichotomy between science and religion.

Stephen Elliott · 13 November 2005

As a 75 yr. old US citizen and combat veteran, I never heard anyone in a foxhole praying to Darwin! The creator of the universe gave us a choice of free will to choose what we want to call it evolution or creation. Man was given the ability to change. Those denying the creator, for a better word, call the ability to change, evolution. Those that deny the creator will themselves be denied by the creator! Those denying the creator for a want of a better word
— George Sota

Surely you do not believe that Evolution threatens God. How could it? Science is about trying to find naturalistic explanations for the wonders of the universe. Isn't religion meant to be about glorifying God? Two completely different fields.

Anton Mates · 13 November 2005

As a 75 yr. old US citizen and combat veteran, I never heard anyone in a foxhole praying to Darwin!

Nobody prays to Darwin outside of foxholes either, but ID supporters don't seem to know that. Perhaps you could explain it to them?

Sir_Toejam · 13 November 2005

I never heard anyone in a foxhole praying to Darwin!

Perhaps then one might conclude that nobody thinks Darwin is a god? did he ever hear anyone praying to Einstein in a foxhole? I would ask the distinguished vet if he ever heard anybody praying to anything that WASN'T god in a foxhole? assuming, of course, that what he said wasn't some senseless plattitude, I wonder how he could then come to the conclusion, based on foxhole aural evidence, that evolutionary biologists deny god? most confusing What would most vets think the single most important thing to saving their lives in war would be, praying to god, or having a rifle at hand? I don't recall any basic training excercises in praying to deter the enemy from shooting you.

'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank · 13 November 2005

As a 75 yr. old US citizen and combat veteran, I never heard anyone in a foxhole praying to Darwin! >/quote>

I once had a Korean war vet give me this whole big long "no atheists in foxholes" song and dance.

I shut him up by asking his if there were any Chinese and North Korean Communists in foxholes nearby. Then asked if he noticed any atheists among them.

Amusing, though, that in many wars, *both* sides pray to the same God to save oneself and to kill the other guy.

morbius · 13 November 2005

As a 75 yr. old US citizen and combat veteran, I never heard anyone in a foxhole praying to Darwin! The creator of the universe gave us a choice of free will to choose what we want to call it evolution or creation.

If you can choose not to sound ignorant and foolish, then why do you do so?

morbius · 13 November 2005

Some one deleter the end of my last sentence in message 56965 which is: Those denying the creator for a wnat of a better word call this change, evolution!

It was God's will (and your bad eyesight).

George Sota · 27 December 2005

Where does the knowledge and IQ of the school board of Kansas City and Dover compare to that of Einstein?
Einstein, as a scientist, claimed that he believed there had to be a creator responsible for all the complexities of the universe.