You see, what had happened was....
If you came here looking for info from Friday's proceedings, don't fret. It's coming. Would you accept any of the following explanations for our tardiness?
A. The hamster that turns the wheel that keeps Speaking Freely going stopped running.
B. The dog ate it.
C. Speaking Freely is an intelligently designed machine with a purposeful arrangement of parts, and when one part is removed, the machine stops functioning.
Seriously, we'll have a recap up this morning. In the meantime, here's a sneak peek (as opposed to a sneak-and-peek): Once again a Dover School Board member contradicted herself on the stand. Here's an excerpt from the coming post:
Meanwhile, yesterday's (Harrisburg) Patriot News outlined the falling-out between the Discovery Institute and the Thomas More Law Center.
A. The hamster that turns the wheel that keeps Speaking Freely going stopped running.
B. The dog ate it.
C. Speaking Freely is an intelligently designed machine with a purposeful arrangement of parts, and when one part is removed, the machine stops functioning.
Seriously, we'll have a recap up this morning. In the meantime, here's a sneak peek (as opposed to a sneak-and-peek): Once again a Dover School Board member contradicted herself on the stand. Here's an excerpt from the coming post:
The most dramatic episode of the day came when Ms. Geesey gave testimony that directly contradicted her depositions, which had been taken in March 2005. On Friday she testified that intelligent design had been the alternative to evolution discussed at the June 2004 board meeting. However, our attorney reminded her of what she had said in her deposition.
Q. What did he [Buckingham] say he wanted to balance Darwinism with at that [June] meeting?
A. At that meeting, I don't know. He wanted another theory at that time. At that time, I don't think he knew.
[at another place in the deposition]
Q. Do you recall a discussion by anyone or a statement by anyone at the June 14 meeting involving the words intelligent design?
A. No.
Ms. Geesey explained the discrepancy by saying that seeing a letter to the editor she'd written that our attorney had questioned her about earlier in the day "refreshed her memory." (Which was interesting, since the letter only mentions creationism, not intelligent design.)
Meanwhile, yesterday's (Harrisburg) Patriot News outlined the falling-out between the Discovery Institute and the Thomas More Law Center.


1 Comments:
>>But in an interview Thursday, Thompson said that the Discovery Institute didn't want Behe or Minnich to testify. He said Behe testified at the behest of the Thomas More Law Center.<<
Ha, I knew it. I guessed last week that the DI didn't really want Behe to testify. Although I suspect he was motivated by arrogance more than anything else.
Post a Comment
<< Home