Toast442.org

It’s a nice Christmas gift! The judge in the Pennsylvania intelligent design trial has ruled today and said:

… (Wait for it) …

That ID isn’t science, can’t divorce itself from it’s creationist and religious roots, and hence, cannot be taught in science classes in PA. Expect the counter suits to begin any day now, as well as Pat Robertson to call for the death of the judge, lawyers, and any “science types” in Pennsylvania.

Can we put this behind us now, please? Keep your fairy tales out of the science classroom. That is all.

Link to CNN article.

This was too funny not to post. Google News picks up these little editorials and letters from small papers around the country with the keywords evolution, intelligent design, etc. Most of these are unintelligible and completely forgettable. But every once in a while, you get something like the following:

Another convincing proof is the fact that there are similarities between species, which would be expected if they were all designed by the same Designer. If evolution is the great unifying principle in biology, why don’t we see the evolution of species today? (The sort of massive change that would be necessary for Darwinism to be true. Imagine. Mammals becoming whales, reptiles becoming birds, etc.) In the absence of such evidence, the proof is strong that one intelligent designer is responsible for whatever similarities exist in nature.

Imagine! WHALES BECOMING MAMMALS! Man, if that ever happened, evolution would have just have to be true. But since they’re, like, fish, or something, there must be a designer.