Late Miocene, Early Pliocene, Gulping Down Thorazine

Because I'm working again (and a day job of all things), I wasn't able to comment in a timely manner on the big decision in Harrisburg today, but as you all know, Judge John E. Jones III ruled that Intelligent Design, as was introduced into the Dover, PA school, is unconstitutional. Yee-haw!! The ruling isn't the best part, however. As Alan Boyle reports on Jones' memorandum opinion:

"...The 139-page opinion was devoted to the proposition that intelligent design was repackaged creationism rather than science. At times, Jones sounded more like a biology professor than a judge — for example, when he countered the view that some biological mechanisms were irreducibly complex by referring to "exaptation," the idea that a mechanism that was developed for one purpose could be adapted to another."

I read through a very small part of the pdf file, but it really tears the original school board new cornshoots:

"After a searching review of the record and applicable caselaw, we find that
while ID arguments may be true, a proposition on which the Court takes no
position, ID is not science. We find that ID fails on three different levels, any one
of which is sufficient to preclude a determination that ID is science. They are: (1)
ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting
supernatural causation; (2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID,
employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation
science in the 1980's; and (3) ID’s negative attacks on evolution have been refuted
by the scientific community."

And futhermore:

It is notable that defense experts’ own mission, which mirrors that of the
IDM itself, is to change the ground rules of science to allow supernatural causation
of the natural world, which the Supreme Court in Edwards and the court in
McLean correctly recognized as an inherently religious concept.

Plus:

"First, defense expert Professor Fuller agreed that ID aspires to “change the ground rules” of science and lead defense expert Professor Behe admitted that his broadened definition of science, which encompasses ID, would also embrace astrology. Moreover, defense expert Professor Minnich acknowledged that for ID to be considered science, the ground rules of science have to be broadened to allow consideration of supernatural forces. We do not find
this false dichotomy any more availing to justify ID today than it was to justify creation science two decades ago."

And:

"ID is at bottom premised upon a false dichotomy, namely, that to the extent evolutionary theory is discredited, ID is confirmed. This argument is not brought to this Court anew, and in fact, the same argument, termed contrived dualism” in McLean, was employed by creationists in the 1980's to support “creation science.” The court in McLean noted the “fallacious pedagogy of the two model approach” and that “[i]n efforts to establish ‘evidence’ in support of creation science, the defendants relied upon the same false premise as the two
model approach . . . all evidence which criticized evolutionary theory was proof in support of creation science.”

Judge Jones ended his opinion with "BI-ATCH!"

In other evolutionary news, I noticed a news report in the science section of MSNBC.COM which tells of research showing the human-chimp ancestor split having occurred between 5 million and 7 million years ago, which narrows the original range considerably. Exciting, eh? What you don't think so?

Well how about this: It won't be long until the return of the Wooly Mammoth! At least 88% of one, anyway, because a planet suffering from the greenhouse effect really needs more sweating beasts.