Intelligent Design, Kansas Science Education and the Law

Posted 25 January 2006 by Jack Krebs

FYI: Here is an announcement for an event we are holding in Lawrence, Kansas this Saturday. We have a n overflow crowd signed up. Of course, we will be reporting on this next week. Bloggers Red State Rabble and Josh Rosenau will be there, as well as lots of other media. We hope to have a film available for interested parties later. Stay tuned. Kansas Citizens For Science and the National Center for Science Education present "Intelligent Design, Kansas Science Education, and the Law" Saturday, January 28, 2006 1:00 -- 5:00 pm The Dole Institute of Politics 2350 Petefish Drive, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, Lawyers in Dover "Intelligent Design" case to speak in Lawrence, Kansas "Intelligent design"(ID) declared unconstitutional in Dover schools! How does this apply to Kansas' state science standards? Eric Rothschild, Steve Harvey and Richard Katskee, attorneys for the Dover plaintiffs, will discuss the legal issues raised in the Dover case. Jack Krebs, President of Kansas Citizens for Science, and Dr. Steve Case, of the Center for Research on Learning at the University of Kansas and co-chair of the Kansas Science Standards Writing Committee will then discuss how those issues apply to the Kansas science standards. NOTE: Seating is limited. Preference will be given to members of the educational, legal, academic, business and religious communities, and the media. Schedule 1:00 -- 1:15 Introductions 1:15 -- 2:15 Eric Rothschild, Steve Harvey and Richard Katskee, attorneys for the Dover plaintiffs 2:15 -- 2:45 Jack Krebs, President of Kansas Citizens For Science 2:45 -- 3:00 Break, light refreshments 3:00 -- 4:30 Panel discussion moderated by Dr. Eugenie Scott, Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education, followed by questions from the audience. Dr. Steve Case will join the panel. 4:30 -- 5:00 Media interviews and individual discussions CONTACT INFO: Reservations for seats: Phil Baringer: baringer@ku.edu Program information: Jack Krebs: jkrebs@sunflower.com 785-840-5113 (c) 785-832-0739 (h) Media contact: Liz Craig: lizard6849@yahoo.com 913-236-7595

24 Comments

steve s · 25 January 2006

Any chance of video?

Wislu Plethora · 25 January 2006

steve s: From the original post:

We hope to have a film available for interested parties later.

I suppose he meant "video."

steve s · 25 January 2006

Somehow I missed that.

Mr Christopher · 25 January 2006

Were members of the Christian Crusaders for Christ invited??

AD · 25 January 2006

Christian Crusaders for Christ seems a bit redundant, doesn't it?

It's not like I thought they'd be Buddhists with a name like Crusaders for Christ.

But, that aside, I'd really like to see/hear/otherwise be given the details of this little get-together. I suppose you should invite some creationists to an equally rigged "debate" similar to the ones they have, and then ridicule them when they won't show, though.

You know, just to use language they understand. I'm not bitter or anything.

Jack Krebs · 25 January 2006

This event is an educational event for supporters of science. We made a concerted effort to invite leaders in education, law, and science from around the state. We've filled up a 120 seat room and have about 50 more watching a big screen live feed out in the main hall of the Dole Institute. The only anti-science people we invited were the 6 creationist Board members and their recently hired Commissioner of Education, and they aren't coming.

Steviepinhead · 25 January 2006

Jack Krebs noted:

The only anti-science people we invited were the 6 creationist Board members and their recently hired Commissioner of Education, and they aren't coming.

I'm shocked, shocked I say! Who among us would have predicted that?

Mr Christopher · 25 January 2006

Jack, any members of the media planning to attend?

And AD, yeah I meant Campus Crusaders for Christ. And this little get together is not a debate, it is a presentation.

Science and Intelligent Design Creationism has already been debated. The mother of all science vs creationism debates took place in Dover, PA. It was sponsored by a neutral third party and included some of the brightest experts on both sides of the argument including Michael "it could be a time traveler" Behe. Without Mr Behe there would be no William Demsbki since Dembski's "theories" are dependent on Behe's.

Intelligent design creationism lost in a big, big way. In fact Behe ended up looking like a total quack and his so called "science" theories ended up in the same category as astrology and palm reading.

Anyhow, so far that was the best science versus intelligent design creationism debate. Another similar debate was planned in California, again, with a neutral thrid party acting as the judge, but it seems the Intelligent Design Creationism side of the debate surrendered before the debate actually took place.

And of course William Dembski chickened out of debating Ken Miller after Dembski had already previously accepted. In faiurness to the theologian and design "intellectual", I suspect the Disocvery Institute (his pimp) cancelled it for him.

Jack Krebs · 25 January 2006

Yes, we have a good selection of Kansas media coming. We are having a press conference, and we are looking into making that available to national media via speakerphone. And we definitely planning on making a tape/DVD available, plus downloadable audio files. We feel the overview by the Dover lawyers and the discussion about Kansas as a specific case will be of both interest and practical use around the country.

Ray P. · 25 January 2006

Comment #75782 posted by Jack Krebs on January 25, 2006 06:06 PM We made a concerted effort to invite leaders in education, law, and science from around the state. **** The only anti-science people we invited were the 6 creationist Board members and their recently hired Commissioner of Education, and they aren't coming.

You sort of contradicted yourself -- you said that there was a concerted effort to invite leaders in education, law, and science from around the state, but you only invited the 6 "creationist" Board members and their recently hired Commissioner of Education. They are leaders in education, but not necessarily leaders in science or law. So what happened to those other leaders whom you were supposed to invite ? You couldn't find them ? The Kansas school board members and their commissioner have a good reason for not attending -- the purpose of the meeting is to discuss grounds for suing the board. Maybe you could invite Kansas Univ. Prof. Paul Mirecki, who became a national laughingstock for posting an email message saying that his new course labeling ID and creationism as "mythologies" was a "nice slap in the big fat face of the fundies." I've noted that he has kept a low profile lately. Anyway, if the cases against the Kansas and Ohio evolution education standards are "slam-dunk," then how come no lawsuits have yet been filed in those states?

Steviepinhead · 25 January 2006

Jack Krebs:

We've filled up a 120 seat room and have about 50 more watching a big screen live feed out in the main hall of the Dole Institute.

Ray P:

So what happened to those other leaders whom you were supposed to invite ? You couldn't find them ?

Note to Ray P: the old reading skills could use a tune-up.

Moses · 25 January 2006

Comment #75818 Posted by Ray P. on January 25, 2006 08:29 PM (e) Anyway, if the cases against the Kansas and Ohio evolution education standards are "slam-dunk," then how come no lawsuits have yet been filed in those states?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaa.... Are you part of Larry's crack legal team? You can't file suit until the policies are actually drawn up and codified. Duh.

Tyrannosaurus · 25 January 2006

Ray P?????

Uh uh, I sense a lurking troll in our midst!!!!!

Apesnake · 25 January 2006

Maybe you could invite Kansas Univ. Prof. Paul Mirecki, who became a national laughingstock for posting an email message saying that his new course labeling ID and creationism as "mythologies" was a "nice slap in the big fat face of the fundies." I've noted that he has kept a low profile lately.
— Ray P

Are you seriously gloating over someone being beaten into silence by your fellow extremists? I find it quite laughable that you seem proud of that. Also, the only ones who are laughing at Mirecki's comments are those to whom they apply i.e. fat faced fundies. Does that include you, pray tell?

The Kansas school board members and their commissioner have a good reason for not attending --- the purpose of the meeting is to discuss grounds for suing the board
— Ray P

Ray must be psychic since that is not the stated purpose of the meeting. Isn't telepathy supposed to be some kind of witchcraft? You have better watch out or some of your own cohorts (either fat faced or slack-jawed) might decide not to suffer a witch to live.

'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank · 25 January 2006

The Kansas school board members and their commissioner have a good reason for not attending --- the purpose of the meeting is to discuss grounds for suing the board.

Good. Let the Kansas Kooks suffer the same fate as the Dover Dolts did. And go for the Ohio Halfwits next.

Maybe you could invite Kansas Univ. Prof. Paul Mirecki, who became a national laughingstock for posting an email message saying that his new course labeling ID and creationism as "mythologies" was a "nice slap in the big fat face of the fundies." I've noted that he has kept a low profile lately.

Perhaps when the Kansas Kooks do get sued, you can invite the Thomas More Law Center to give them a, uh, world-class defense. For free. I notice THEY'VE kept a low profile, too.

Anyway, if the cases against the Kansas and Ohio evolution education standards are "slam-dunk," then how come no lawsuits have yet been filed in those states?

I strongly suspect you'll get your chance. And I strongly suspect that you won't like the results.

Jack Krebs · 25 January 2006

It is true that one of the topics of the forum will be to consider whether the Kansas science standards might be unconstitutional if held to the same criteria described in the Dover decision. However, you would think that the creationist Board members would profit by listening to that - at least they will hear some of the arguments that might be used against them.

Flint · 25 January 2006

you would think that the creationist Board members would profit by listening to that

And of course, we're all well aware of how well creationists listen to anything.

'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank · 25 January 2006

It is true that one of the topics of the forum will be to consider whether the Kansas science standards might be unconstitutional if held to the same criteria described in the Dover decision. However, you would think that the creationist Board members would profit by listening to that - at least they will hear some of the arguments that might be used against them.

Well, one would THINK that the Kansas Kooks would be able to read the Dover decision for themselves and see that they don't have a prayer. ;)

improvius · 26 January 2006

Did someone forget to invite Pedro Irigonegaray? I've been hoping to hear more from him after the excellent job he did in the Kansas hearings.

Jack · 26 January 2006

Pedro Irigonegarary will be there as a special guest, although he is not on the panel.

AD · 26 January 2006

Guys & Gals, I was being sarcastic. I actually highly commend any effort at legitimate public education, and my point was simply that people are going to twist this effort into whatever they want to believe it is (Ray P nicely proved my point already) because they are incapable of viewing science in a properly objective light.

Either way, I hope the larger majority of people who do have functioning reason centers in their brains will learn a few things from this, and I certainly appreciate the effort. Speaking seriously, inviting creationists is pretty counter-productive - their minds are made up and they listen to appeals to emotion rather than reason, which is precisely the kind of argument science refuses to make. You can't convince them because you won't play by their rules.

But, having said that, the same refusal to do that is why science wins convincingly in court every time.

Mr Christopher · 26 January 2006

AD said... Guys & Gals, I was being sarcastic....

My apologies, AD. I am changing the battery in my sarcasm meter as we speak. This is not the first time I have gotten a false reading :-)

Jeff G. · 26 January 2006

Christian Crusaders for Christ seems a bit redundant, doesn't it? It's not like I thought they'd be Buddhists with a name like Crusaders for Christ.

I dunno. There are Jews for Jesus chapters....

Caty Tota · 14 June 2006

You guys are the 55808 best, thanks so much for the help.