Evolution News and Views (ENV) provides original reporting and analysis about the debate over intelligent design and evolution, including breaking news about scientific research.

Evolution News and Views

Miller Testimony, Day II

Harrisburg, PA – In the second morning of testimony in the ACLU’s lawsuit against a Dover, Pennsylvania school district, Darwinist Kenneth Miller conceded that in one sense he was a creationist, since he attributed the laws of physics and chemistry to an “author of all things, seen and unseen.”

He read back a portion of the testimony he gave when he served as a fact witness in the Cobb County, Georgia textbook sticker case, in which he defined creationism in its narrow, contemporary sense as a view arguing for a young earth (6-10,000 years) , six 24-hour days of creation by a supernatural being, and a geological record largely explained by a global flood. In this morning’s testimony, Miller conceded that biochemist and leading design theorist Michael Behe’s arguments contained none of these elements.

Under questioning from the defense, Miller said that in his biology classes he directs students to his website for additional resources, which includes material written by him about intelligent design. He said that he felt it was good pedagogy to offer his students resources for answering questions they might have about intelligent design.

The defense attorney questioning Miller left the irony of this implicit: The Dover school district’s policy calls for administrators to read a brief statement to biology students indicating that if students want to learn about intelligent design, they can find a supplementary science textbook, Of Pandas and People, in the school library. This is the policy that Miller and the ACLU oppose.

Also, in yesterday’s testimony, Miller called attention to a factual error in Pandas. In today’s questioning, he conceded that the “elephant” edition of his own high school biology textbook contained an error, describing evolution as a “random and undirected process.” Miller said that that wasn’t a scientific statement, and it was removed from subsequent editions.