home

=The Evolution vs. Intelligent Design Debate: An Annotated Timeline=

The Scientist for Life students at Buffalo Seminary created an annotated timeline as they explored the evolution vs. intelligent design debate.

Introduction In order to understand the Landmark events in the Evolution v. Intelligent Design Debate, it is necessary to understand some basic terms and ideas that play a major part in some significant decisions that will be explained following the Introduction. As Science is such a broad term, it is difficult to define. Generally, it means the "human effort to understand, or to understand better, the history of the natural world and how the natural world works, with observable physical evidence as the basis of that understanding," as quoted by Dr. Bruce Railsback of University of Georgia. [1] As defined by Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, a theory is "the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another." In science, a theory is a logical explanation, or a tested hypothesis, to a physical phenomenon in science. According to the scientific method [2], this hypothesis is continually tested through various experiments. After the hypothesis has been continually verified correct, the hypothesis can be considered a theory to predict what will happen in the future. In science, a theory can be considered valid until there is sufficient evidence to prove it wrong. [3] As defined by Britannica Online, "Evolution is the theory in biology postulating that the various types of plants, animals, and other living things on Earth have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations." [ 4] If a mutation occurs in a certain species that could benefit the life of this particular organism, (he/she/it is better suited for the current conditions than the others) he/she/it will survive longer than the rest. [5] This organism will also reproduce more as it will survive longer. The better suited type of this species will then last longer and become more prominent. This is also known as "Survival of the Fittest or “Natural Selection.” [6] Intelligent Design is the “assertion or belief that physical and biological systems observed in the universe result from purposeful design by an intelligent being.” [7] Intelligent design proponents refute the Theory of Evolution and say that some systems are “ irreducibly complex” and that if “missing a part the systems would become, by definition, nonfunctional” [8]    **How are the two related?**  The relationship between Evolution and Intelligent Design Advocates has become increasingly tense. Landmark cases, such as Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, have peaked the interest of many people across the United States. Below is an annotated timeline of the important events related to the Evolution v. Intelligent Design Debate.
 * What is Science?**
 * What is a Theory?**
 * What is Evolution?**
 * What is Intelligent design?**

Big Bang and Formation of the Solar System
To set the stage for Darwin's common ancestor we must first understand how scientists have theorized the origin of the Universe and our solar system.

// The Big Bang. // The Universe has a definite beginning as it was born anywhere around 13.7 billion years ago. The entire universe was once a singularity. A singularity is a tiny ball of infinite density. That ball began to expand and continues to expand today.

// The Formation of the Solar System // Scientists believe a supernova exploded which resulted into a cloud of solar dust and matter. That cloud began to collapse under its own gravity, causing a solar nebula to form. That nebula began to spin and became hotter and denser in the center. The particles of the cloud began to stick together and form clumps that would become moons and planets. The planets like Earth and Mars formed near the hot center because they are made of rocky material that could withstand the heat. Planets like Jupiter and Saturn formed farther away from the center. The cloud continued to fall in, causing the center to become extremely hot and eventually formed the star known as our Sun. The Sun had small explosions that caused solar winds. Those winds blew the lighter materials (hydrogen and helium) away from the center and the rocky planets to the now more gaseous planets like Neptune.

//The Origin of Species//, 1859 by: Charles Darwin
=== On December 27, 1831, Charles Darwin, a naturalist, left England and set sail to South America on a five year voyage as a companion to the captain, Robert Fitzroy. He was aboard the H.M.S Beagle on a survey mission to chart the coasts of Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego [12]. On his voyage he read “Lyell’s Principles of Geology”, which proposed that fossils found in rocks were evidence of animals that previously lived many thousands of years ago. The central idea is that geological remains found in the past continue onto the present in a process, and are capable of being observed [15]. On September 15, 1835, he arrived in the Galapagos Islands and stayed almost a month. There, Darwin observed the plants and animals of the region and recorded them in his journal. Their characteristics differed on islands next door to one another [15, 16]. But in particular he noticed that each island had finches with different and similar characteristics. His observations in the Galapagos Islands strengthened Lyell’s principle that certain characteristics of the finches were carried on from the past and apparent in the present [14]. ===


===  Upon his return to England in 1863, he was amazed by the esteem from the scientific community, and was elected secretary to the Geological Society of London [15]. Darwin put together all his notes and observations to figure out how species evolve. He came to develop a theory of evolution occurring by the process of natural selection. This theory suggests that animals or plants best suited to their environment by dominant characteristics will survive and therefore reproduce, passing their traits onto the next generation. Gradually these species will change over time. This theory led to his publishing of the //Origin of Species//, 1859, [13, 14]. This experience was marked as one of the most important events in Darwin’s life [15]. ===


===  His book was both popular and controversial. The church thought his theory of evolution was contrary to the teachings of the bible. It also generated much discussion of scientific, philosophical, and religious grounds. Today, scientists embrace Darwin’s theory of evolution, and use it to introduce evolutionary biology [13].  ===


=== Slowly but surely the book became more well known and in September, 1861, Darwin’s //Origin of Species// was in the process of getting translated into French, Dutch, and German. A scholar friend of Darwin’s gave a speech on evolution in Edinburgh, Scotland. He received great enthusiasm from the audience, and when news reached Darwin he was overjoyed. In January, 1863, a lizard-bird fossil was discovered in Solenhofen, Germany. Richard Owen bought it for the British Museum and called the fossil "Archaeopteryx.” At first the fossil appeared to look like a bird, but with further examination it carried many characteristics that only a lizard had: teeth, and a bony tail. This helped to support Darwin’s theory of evolution [16].  ===

Scopes Monkey Trial

 * The State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes** (The Scopes "Monkey" Trial)


 * 1925**

On March 21, Governor Austin Peay signs the Butler Bill into law. The Butler Bill supports the teaching of creationism and strictly outlaws the teaching of human evolution from animals(17). On May 4, the American Civil Liberties Union spread the word that they would pay all court fees for anyone willing to challenge the Butler Bill(18).

In April, John T. Scopes, a schoolteacher in Dayton, Tennessee, was convicted of assigning a chapter about evolution while serving as a substitute teacher of a biology. He was also convincted of teaching evolution to his general science class(19). It was clear that his teachings were a violation of the Butler Bill, and on May 5, John T. Scopes becomes to be the first teacher to testify against the Butler Bill in a Tennessee court. The Worlds Christian Fundamentals Organization has William Bryan Jennings represent them in court and become the prosecutor of Scopes in the Scopes "Monkey" Trial (17).

Essentially, Scopes is a violator of the Butler Bill and will be presented in court againt Jennings to debate the outcome of the teaching of evolution in the classroom.

Clarence Darrow volunteers to defend John Scopes in trial. He attempts to prove that the Butler Bill is unconstitutional, but these efforts turn into a large debate concerning religion. Darrow brings many esteemed scientists to the stand but nothing could compare to his rigorous questioning of William Brian Jennings (17). After much of July passed, and the deliberation of this trial ended, John T. Scopes is considered guilty and charged with a one hundred dollar fine (18).

Edwards v. Aguillard
Edwards vs. Aguillard was a case heard by Supreme Court of U.S. The case was argued on December 10th 1986 and the decision was made on June 19th 1987. (21) The decision of the case nullified the Louisiana law titled the “ Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science in Public School Instruction Act” that was put in place in 1982. It is often referred to as the “Creationism Act”. It forbade the teaching of the theory of evolution in public schools unless accompanied by instruction in “creation science.” No school was required to teach either, but if one was taught, it had to be accompanied by the other. (22) The law was seen as unconstitutional. Justice William J. Brennan ruled that it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment based on the Lemon test. (23) The Lemon test is a three pronged test that is used to determine if a law violates the First Amendment. (24) The three prongs include: the government’s action must have a secular purpose, the government’s action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion, and the government’s action must not result in an “excessive government entanglement” with religion. (25) The court ruled that the law was unconstitutional with a majority rule of 7 to 2. (23)

//Of Pandas & People//
The Of Pandas and People phenomenon has evolved in recent years as an alternative to teaching evolution in the classroom. Science is a theory, being tested and tested with the slightest chance that something may change within the next time of trial. With this being said, Of Pandas and People evolved merely to oust the regular biology textbook linked with Darwinism, by replacing it with a different spin on evolution and creationism(26, 27, 28 ,29). The new idea that Of Pandas and People is trying to relay is Intelligent Design (26, 27, 29). Of Pandas and People was published in 1989. Its second textbook was published in 1993. The second edition of Pandas was the last. Of Pandas and People uses words such as Intelligent Design, Intelligent Designer, and Design Proponents to explain their research and to keep away from Darwinism(29). Much of the controversy over this topic of ID has been caused by this controversial textbook (27). In the late 80's and early 90's, Of Pandas and People with the approval of creationists began surfacing in many public schools(28). Of Pandas and People became a major issue in the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover case, where Dover school board approved the text to be placed in the library as an alternative to Darwin’s theory (26). The school board also proposed that the science teachers, before using the Biology textbook, read a one minute statement stating that science is a theory, and that Darwinism is merely a tested theory(27). The thought of Intelligent Design and Of Pandas and People even being involved as a reference in the school enraged many parents. The case went to court. After many months of trial, the court ruled that ID is not science and Of Pandas and People is stating that ID is indeed a cover-up for creationism(26, 29). Of Pandas and People is said to be a text that is “not going to be taken seriously by any teacher who has a professional knowledge of science” (27). So far, teachers and school boards have not accepted the text. Pandas seems to have lost all of its fight for the battle. The idea of Intelligent Design is not science, and neither is the creationist text Of Pandas and People (27). Of Pandas and People will find it a hard challenge to change people’s minds that the text is science.

=Kansas School Board Backs Intelligent Design=


 * [[image:http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2005/11/08/PH2005110802134.jpg width="210" height="196" align="center" caption="(5)"]] ||
 * (34) ||

On November 8, 2005, the Kansas school board held a vote that would rock the state, the nation and the world. The vote, which divided the school board six to four, established that Intelligent Design would be presented as an alternative to evolution in the Kansas school system. (30) The decision, considered extremely controversial, drew extreme reactions from both sides. Those in support of the decision stated that they felt it encouraged free speech, academic enrichment, and scientific thought. However, opponents claimed the decision was simply an effort to replace science with religion and the result of Conservative politics. (34) One opponent, who voted against the change, stated: “This is a sad day, not only for Kansas kids, but for Kansas. We’re becoming a laughingstock, not only of the nation, but of the world.” (34) Though the board itself does not decide what is taught in the classrooms, they do choose what material will appear on standardized, state-wide tests. Therefore, in choosing to include Intelligent Design as a challenge to evolution in testing, the board was essentially implementing the theory into the classroom. (30) Additionally, the board redefined its definition of science, so as to embrace Intelligent Design. The old definition, "Science is the human activity of seeking natural explanations for what we observe in the world around us.", was altered to define science as "a systematic method of continuing investigation that uses observation, hypothesis testing, measurement, experimentation, logical argument and theory building to lead to more adequate explanations of natural phenomena." (35) The controversy went to trial on May 6th, 2006, when a series of hearings were conducted by the proponents of the change. The hearings brought forth many doctors, scientists, and professors who explained the problems facing evolutionary theory and condoned the teaching of Intelligent Design. (31) Evolutionary supporters refused to appear or testify at the hearings, boycotting the change. They insisted the trial was simply a chance for Intelligent Design backers to platform their theory, calling the trial “a farce” (32) Indeed, the hearings did seem rather biased from the start, with the jury consisting of three school board members who had already publicly announced their support of Intelligent Design. (32) Despite this, the opposition did hire Pedro Irogonegaray, a top civil rights lawyer, to argue against the change. Ironegaray questioned the scientists present on the true motives behind their responses, drawing references from religion to diminish the validity of their testimony (31) However, the new standards were never able to be fully integrated by the school system due to Kansas School Board elections in August of 2006. The elections swayed the power away from the Republican majority that had voted for Intelligent Design earlier in November. On Tuesday, August second, five of the ten seats on the school board opened up for re-election, allowing Moderates to claim a key number of three spots, restoring the majority in their favor. (33)

Sources: all accessed April 24, 2008 -

Kitzmiller v. Dover School Board
THE BACKGROUND Kitzmiller vs. Dover School Board is a case rooted in the different opinions of the Dover School Board members and the science department as well as parents of Dover in Dover, Pennsylvania. Bill Buckingham in addition to other school board members wanted to spend equal time in the science classroom for creationism and evolution. However, this violates the 1987 Supreme Court ruling that creationism in the classroom violates the separation of Church and State (36). With this in mind, Bill Buckingham lead other school board members into a debate on the authenticity of Darwin's ideals and the possibility of other theories. When equal time for creationism and evolution was not allowed, Bill Buckingham went in search for a new bio book that did not contain only Darwin's theory of evolution (38). The solution was //Of Pandas and People// being cotaught with the current textbook. The science textbooks were anonymously donated to the school. The science teachers were also told to read a passage written by the school board discussing that there are other theories besides Darwin. When the science teachers refused to read the passage saying that it went against science teachings and beliefs, a board member came into the biology class and read the passage to the students. The science teachers as well as several parents were outraged with the incident. Soon, the controversy lead to the trial: Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (36).

THE TRIAL The Dover School Board was represented by the Thomas More Law Center went up against TAmmy Kitzmiller. Judge Jones resided over the case. The trial began on September 26, 2005 (38). The question begining argued in the court room centered around, "What is science and what qualifies as science?" The plaintiffs went out to prove that the school board members took Intelligent Design as a replacement form of teaching for creationism. Some of the witnesses included Kenneth R. Miller, the author of the original biology book, Dover science teachers, Tammy Kitzmiller, experts on Intelligent Design, David DeRosier, who spoke of the human-like design of the flagellum motor. During the trial, scientist expressed the meaning of science theory and the need for repeated testing. Others worked to The trial ended on November 4, 2005 with closing arguments and final remarks from the court (36). Judge Jones came back with a verdict on December 20, 2005. He ruled that the Dover School District went against the constitutional rights of the students in regards to the separation Church and State (38).

President Bush's views
**
 * President Bush's views on the Intelligent Design vs. Evolution debate:

==I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought," Bush said. You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes."(41)==

On April 1, 2005, during a round-table interview with reporters from five Texas newspapers, President George W. Bush remarked that he believed intelligent design should be taught alongside evolution in public schools "...so people can understand what the debate is about."(40) While he does oppose the idea of the federal government choosing school's curriculum instead of individual school districts, he backs his pro-intelligent design statements by adding that school is a place to be exposed to different ideas and thoughts. This was the first time President Bush had remarked on intelligent design during an interview. President George Bush also defended Baltimore Orioles first baseman Rafael Palmeiro, who was suspended for using steroids. President Bush declined to share his personal views on intelligent design with the reporters. The President had previously stated in Science Magazine in the March 2005 issue that "scientific critiques of any theory should be a normal part of the science curriculum."(40) "**THE PRESIDENT**: I think -- as I said, harking back to my days as my governor . . . Then, I said that, first of all, that decision should be made to local school districts, but I felt like both sides ought to be properly taught. "**Q** Both sides should be properly taught? "**THE PRESIDENT**: Yes, people -- so people can understand what the debate is about. "**Q** So the answer accepts the validity of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution? "**THE PRESIDENT**: I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought, and I'm not suggesting -- you're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes.(42)
 * __The Interview:__**
 * Q** I wanted to ask you about the -- what seems to be a growing debate over evolution versus intelligent design. What are your personal views on that, and do you think both should be taught in public schools?

In response to President Bush's remarks, the American Geophysical Union, a scientific society of 43,000 members in the earth and space sciences and the National Science Teachers Association issued statements against the inclusion of intelligent design being taught in the classroom.

We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including __Dr. John Marburger__, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science. Intelligent design has no place in the science classroom.(42)
 * Statement Issued by Gerry Wheeler, NSTA Executive Director:**


 * [[image:http://news.uns.purdue.edu/images/+2006/marburger-john.jpg width="86" height="134" caption="Dr. John Marburger III"]]

Dr. John Marburger wished to play down the remarks made by President Bush:** Mr. Marburger said in a telephone interview [with the New York Times] that "evolution is the cornerstone of modern biology" and "intelligent design is not a scientific concept." Mr. Marburger also said that Mr. Bush's remarks should be interpreted to mean that the president believes that intelligent design should be discussed as part of the "social context" in science classes. (43)

"It's what I've been pushing, it's what a lot of us have been pushing," and said that evolution "is too often taught as fact," and that "if you're going to teach the Darwinian theory as evolution, teach it as theory. And then teach another theory that has the most support among scientists." (43)
 * Dr. Richard Land, the president of the ethics and religous liberties commision of the Southern Baptist Convention, and has close ties to the White House also commented on President Bush's interview:**

The Discovery Institute in Seattle, a leader in developing intelligent design, was also happy to hear President Bush's remarks.

Even though what President Bush stated sounded fair, it isn't. In the end, Intelligent Design is a religous opinion, not fact, and teaching it in school even if to simply learn about it in a social context would not be appropriate for a science classroom. The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, called the president's comments irresponsible, and said that "when it comes to evolution, there is only one school of scientific thought, and that is evolution occurred and is still occurring." Mr. Lynn added that "when it comes to matters of religion and philosophy, they can be discussed objectively in public schools, but not in biology class." (43)

FL Academic Freedom Act
For years, the fight for evolution and its importance in science education has been debated. Starting as early as 1831, when Charles Darwin sailed on the H.M.S. Beagle, he came back with theories, evidence, and idea. These ideas shook the scientific and religious communities of England, and eventually the world around him (45). Consequently, in 1837, when he presented his theories about the Galapagos Islands, the issues that arose were not too surprising. Critics of Darwin believed that God had created the thirteen species that were present on the Islands, and that the theory of natural selection was a mistake made by Darwin. However, as time went on, scientists have continued to prove that Darwin's theories were in fact true (45). So why is it that now, over 150 years later, people are still trying to disprove Darwin's widely accepted theory of evolution? It appears that God, and the belief by some that religion should be a part of education in schools, is breaking the fragile line of the separation of church and state. For some state school systems, this historical separation is slowing being violated. Recently, in the sunny state of Florida, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 7-3 to submit the Academic Evolution Freedom Act. This act stated that there would be a guarantee that teachers and students in Florida public schools could "challenge" theories of Darwinism in the classroom. This act was submitted only two months after the Florida Board of Education voted for the first time to require the teaching of evolution. One wonders why such a quick change would be implemented. According to the lawmakers in this case, teachers who were critical of Darwin and his theories were being bullied by administrators (44). The new bill, it seems, would allow the freedom of teachers to tell their students about their views and let the students take from it what they may. If evolution is a theory and is being taught, why can't other theories is brought into the classroom? Teachers who believe this statement think of themselves as leaders in the field of alternate theories. However, are these teachers and committees real leaders or simply people attempting to promote religion in schools? While the idea of "academic freedom" is a noteworthy cause, the notion that God is somehow embedded in the idea of cannot be tolerated. The separation of church and state must be upheld in order for this country to run smoothly, according to the Constitution. So what does this mean for the future of the Floridian state education system? One wonders if intelligent design, and the ideas that surround it such as irreducible complexity, is the next step for the state. One hopes that there will never come a time when the line between church and state be crossed (46). It is our job as Americans to uphold the Constitution by ensuring that the delicate balance between church and state remains undisturbed.

**Missouri House Bill No. 2554 and Failed Missouri House Bills No.911, 1722,1266**

__House Bill No. 2554-Teacher Academic Freedom__ //Sponsor:// Robert Wayne Cooper (Republican) //Introduced:// April 1, 2008 //Last Action:// April 24, 2008 Referred: Elementary and Secondary Education [48] //Summary:// This bill would amend a current state policy, in an attempt to grant teachers more freedom in the teaching of science. "Toward this end, teachers shall be permitted to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of theories of biological and chemical evolution." The proposed goal of the bill is to create in schools an environment of questioning, and further learning about up and coming developments as well as learn to deal with differences and issues which arise when addressing controversial issues[48] [51].

__Failed House Bills No. 911, 1722,1266__ //Sponsor:// Robert Wayne Cooper (Republican) //Co-Sponsors:// Annie Reinhart(R), Cynthia Davis(R), Brian Nieves(R), Susan Phillips(R), Edgar Emery(R), and Steve Hunter(R) //Introduced:// January 7, 2004 (911) April 7, 2004 (1722) January 9, 2006 (1266) [49] //Summary:// (911 Missouri Standard Science Act) This act, defines science in the context of what can be taught in schools. The definition includes intelligent design to be taught as scientific theory. It calls for equal time in the teaching old evolution and intelligent design. Bills 1722 Standard Science Instruction and 1266 Missouri Science Education Act mandated "the equal treatment of science instruction regarding evolution and intelligent design"[53] with failure to do so resulting in a termination of contract. HB 1266 uses same principal without using the words intelligent design [50] [52]. __Future of Bill 2554__ House Bill 2554 is one of at least three attempts by Robert Wayne Cooper to have intelligent design or a similarly structured concept brought up in the Missouri House of Representatives. The majority of his sponsored bills include those pertaining to healthcare; however, many can be found relating to religion, abortion positions, and other faith fueled issues. Cooper has even been quoted saying such statements as "If we're just a piece of matter in a meaningless universe, you're going to treat yourself different than if you're a designed product." Like many of the other intelligent design bills, his proposed legislation hangs on the definition of a scientific theory [49].

However, this legislation has once again raised the issue of teaching alternate scientific ideas in the classroom to the Missouri House of Representatives. Additionally, HB 2554 does not mandate or demand certain ideas be addressed, just that teachers have the freedom to discuss alternatives to help foster an environment of higher learning and questioning in the schools [48] [51].

The Academic Freedom Bill
In a 2008 regular session of the Louisiana state legislature, Senator Nevers wrote a bill, for teachers, providing for the Louisiana Academic freedom Act. The bill was an act to open the discussion of certain limitations and prohibitions of specific scientific evidence. The Louisiana Board of Education feels that the “Louisiana Science Framework” should be properly demonstrated, that logical and critical thinking should be used to analyze and construct explanations, evidence and alternative thoughts in the process of scientific inquiry. The bill states that school governing authorities are, “to help students develop critical thinking skills, and respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about controversial issues”. Section E of the bill protects the teaching of scientific information. It states that the bill is not to promote religion or non religion, or discrimination for or against a subject. The bill states that by the 2008-2009 school year the provisions of this bill will need to be distributed by the state superintendent of schools to all school authorities.

Footnotes:
[1] Railsback, Bruce, Dr. "What is Science?" What is Science? __14 Dec. 2007. University of Georgia, Department of Geology. 22 Apr. 2008 <__ [|http://www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/1122science2.html#WHATISSCIENCE.)] [2]  ("Steps of the Scientific Method." Science Buddies__. 2008. Kenneth Lafferty Hess Family Charitable Foundation. 22 Apr. 2008 < [|http://www.sciencebuddies.org/mentoring/project_scientific_method.shtml> __] __ [3] Helmenstine, Anne, Dr. "Scientific Hypothesis, Theory, Law Definitions." __About.com__. 2008. About Inc. New York Times Company. 23 Apr. 2008 <[|http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistry101/a/lawtheory.htm>.] [4]  "Evolution." __Encyclopædia Britannica__. 2008. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 23 Apr. 2008 < [|http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9106075 >. [5]  "evolution." __Encyclopædia Britannica__. 2008. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 23 Apr. 2008 < [|http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-49853 >. [6] ("Survival of the Fittest." __Answers.com__. 2008. Answers Corporation. 22 Apr. 2008__ [|http://www.answers.com/topic/survival-of-the-fittest?cat=technology.) [7] ("intelligent design." //The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition//. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. 22 Apr. 2008. .) [8] ( [|http://www.nwcreation.net/intelligentdesign.html) (Michael Behe, Associate Professor of Biochemistry at Lehigh University, 1996) [9] [|http://www.big-bang-theory.com]  [10]   [|http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/our_solar_system/formation.html  [11] [|http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/solarsystem_worldbook.html

16) [|http://www.aboutdarwin.c]om/timeline/time_07.html#0020
===(17) "Timeline: Monkey Trial." PBS Online. 2002. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/monkeytrial/timeline/index.html (18) "The Scopes 'Monkey' Trial." Crevo Press. 2004. http://www.scopestrial.org/ (19) "John Scopes." Doug Lindler. 2004. http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/SCO_SCO.HTM (20) USA Today. [|http://images.usatoday.com/tech/_ph]otos/2005/10/10/scopes180.jpg=== ===21. http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/edwards.html. “Justice Brennan delivered the decision of the Court.” April 24, 2008 22. http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0482_0578_ZS.html. “Edwards vs. Aguillard.” April 24, 2008. 23. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=482&invol=578 “Edwards v. Aguillard.” April 24, 2008 24. http://www.usconstitution.net/lemon.html. “The Lemon Test.” April 24, 2008 25. http://candst.tripod.com/tnppage/eclause2.htm “The Lemon Test” April 24, 2008 26) http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/09/banned_book_of_the_year_of_pan.html 27) Judgement Day. Jay O. Sanders. Nova and Vulcan productions, INC. 2007. 28) http://www.textbookleague.org/53panda.htm 29)[|http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/8442_1_introduction_iof_pandas__11_23_2004.asp 30) http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/11/08/evolution.debate.ap/ 31)http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D00EEDD1430F935A35756C0A9639C8B63 32)http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/05/06/echoes_of_scopes_trial_heard_in_intelligent_design_hearing/ 33) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14137751/ 34) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/08/AR2005110801211.html 35)http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/15/science/sciencespecial2/15evol.html?ex=1289710800&en=8222cfc9c70fd951&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss   36) http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/307/5709/505 37) http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/dover.html 38) [|http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/kitzmiller_v_dover.html 39) Bush Remarks On 'Intelligent Design' Theory Fuel Debate http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/02/AR2005080201686_2.html **40) Bush endorses 'intelligent design'** http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/08/02/bush_endorses_intelligent_design/ **41) President Bush Endorses Intelligent Design? **http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/news/2005/US/231_president_bush_endorses_intell_8_3_2005.asp **42) Bush Remarks Roil Debate on Teaching of Evolution** http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/03/politics/03bush.html **43) Bush: Schools should teach intelligent design** [|http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8792302/     </span]> (44) The Christian Post.23 April 2008. http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080410/31897_Florida_Submits_%5C'Evolution_Academic_Freedom_Act%, 5C'_to_Senate.htm. (45) Darwin and Natural Selection.23 April 2008.http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_2.htm (46) Religious Freedom Resources.24 April 2008.[|http://www.adl.org/issue_religious_freedom/separation_cs_primer.asp|http] (47) Intelligent Design The Future.25 April2008.[|http://www.idthefuture.com/2008/03/florida_teacher_speaks_out_on.html     </span]> [48] Cooper, Robert Wayne. “HB 2554 -- Teacher Academic Freedom.” __Missouri House of Representatives__. 24 Apr. 2008. 25 Apr. 2008 <[|http://www.house.mo.gov/‌billtracking/‌bills081/‌bills/‌hb2554.htm>.] [49] - - -. “Summary of the Introduced Bills.” __Missouri House of Representatives__. 23 Sept. 2004. 25 Apr. 2008 <[|http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills081/member/mem155.htm>.] [50]Levy, Gayle. “Evolution Debate in Missouri (1-04-05).” __American Geological Institute__. 4 Jan. 2005. 25 Apr. 2008 <[|http://www.agiweb.org/‌gap/‌evolution/‌MO_cont.html>.] [51] “A New Antievolution Bill in Missouri.” __National Center for Science Educaiton__. 4 Apr. 2008. 25 Apr. 2008 <[|http://www.ncseweb.org/‌resources/‌news/‌2008/‌MO/‌970_a_new_antievolution_bill_in_mi_4_4_2008.asp>.] [52] Robinson, B. A. “INTELLIGENT DESIGN (ID):PENDING ID BILLS IN STATE LEGISLATURES AND COURT CHALLENGES.” __Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance__. 2 Aug. 2005. 25 Apr. 2008 <[|http://www.religioustolerance.org/‌ev_id5.htm]>. [53]Carroll, Robert Todd. "Intelligent Design."__The Skeptic's Dictionary__. 24 Apr. 2008. 10 Apr. 2008. <[|http://www.skepdic.com/intelligentdesign.html>.] ===