Dover High School Biology Statement of 2004.

Dover High School Biology Statement

On November 19, 2004, the Dover Area School District issued a press release stating that, commencing in January 2005, teachers would be required to read the following statement to students in the ninth-grade biology class at Dover High School:

The Pennsylvania Academic Standards require students to learn about Darwin's theory of evolution and eventually to take a standardized test of which evolution is a part.

Because Darwin's Theory is a theory, it is still being tested as new evidence is discovered. The Theory is not a fact. Gaps in the Theory exist for which there is no evidence. A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation that unifies a broad range of observations.

Intelligent design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin's view. The reference book, Of Pandas and People is available for students to see if they would like to explore this view in an effort to gain an understanding of what intelligent design actually involves.

As is true with any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind. The school leaves the discussion of the origins of life to individual students and their families. As a standards-driven district, class instruction focuses upon preparing students to achieve proficiency on standards-based assessments.

The Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District court case is to become ground zero for the very first direct challenge to expose the fraud being played out, involving Intelligent Design (ID) being taught in a public school. The ID movement being a political based platform that is trying to sell the psuedo-science (a masquerade of Christian science), a self designated alternative to Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.

As with any salesman, those within the ID political machine targeted a bunch of like-minded political Christian customers, who would buy the ID product without having the knowledge or performing the due diligence required for their positions as Board Trustees. Without understand the pseudo-science that is ID, members of the Dover Board of Education, William Buckingham and Allan Bonsell both placed their youth-earth creationist religion, above their oaths of office and incorporated the use of ID into the ninth-grade science classrooms.

This matter actually started over a year early, in June of 2004 at a Board Meeting where Mr. Buckingham raised objections to the use of the Kenneth Miller and Joseph Levine’s widely excepted textbook – Biology: Discovery Life. The objections were rooted around the allegations that the textbook was ‘laced with Darwinism’ and there was ‘nothing to counterbalance it’. The Board Meeting being a public affair, had caused Mr. Buckingham’s revelations to become newsworthy and published in the city of York’s newspapers.

The account, as described by Mr. Buckingham, was that of a telephone call he received by one Seth Cooper, a Discovery Institute staff attorney, who proposes the benefits of ID. Mr. Cooper’s tasks included communicating with legislators, school board memebers and teachers, about the topic of ID and the responsible route of scientific and educational advantages within a public science cirrcumlum.

As with any scam, when the light of scrutiny is shone, ID and its backers Seth Cooper and the Discovery Institute could not dive for cover quick enough, especially in bailing on any alleged advice given to Mr. Buckingham. Mr. Cooper is to have after the fact stated, that he called Mr. Buckingham to steer him and the Dover Board of Education away from ID, the inclusion of ID, the use of ID in the classroom or for the mentioning of ID within the school cirricumlum, all of which is denied by Mr. Buckingham’s account. Also, it is contended that Mr. Cooper informed Mr. Buckingham to clarify any information which was shared cannot be seen as legal advice and Mr. Cooper and the Discovery Institute were not to be held for any legal responsibilities.

I find it quite peculiar that the Discovery Institute the main backer of ID, would preach the virtues of ID and the possible uses of it, then only distance its self from ID’s teaching or mention within the Dover Board of Education’s cirriculum, when public scrutiny is applied.