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 a new episode of ID the Future, I mark the upcoming 20th anniversary of the Dover verdict 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 and Culture held on the issues at stake.
Freedom to Build a Scientific Case
For a scientific theory of origins to be properly evaluated, its proponents must be given the freedom to build a scientific case that will allow people to decide for themselves which theory best explains the evidence. At Discovery Institute, our long-standing policy, both before and after the Dover trial, has been to see ID grow and develop as a science. “We’ve always believed that at the end of the day, science is what is going to settle the debate over intelligent design,” says Luskin. “It’s not going to be settled by court rulings or politics or legal stuff. It’s going to be settled by science. And the best way to have ID advance is to allow ID-friendly scientists to be able to do research and develop the scientific case for ID in the academy.”
In a separate episode, Luskin continues the conversation by discussing the outcome of the Dover trial, the short and long-term impact of the trial on the scientific debate, and how the intelligent design movement has flourished in the two decades since. Download the podcast or listen to it here.
Dig Deeper
- Want more? Read Traipsing Into Evolution, a concise but comprehensive response to federal Judge John E. Jones’s decision in the Kitzmiller v. Dover case.
- Video: Watch Casey explain all the reasons ID is not “over after Dover”: