When he departed the Discovery Institute, lawyer and pamphlet distributor (at the Dover Trial) I figured wherever casey luskin landed we had not heard the last of him. The Discovery Institute's Evolution 'News' and Views website had this little article about something little casey had written. However, something seemed off to me. Here is the link: "In Court Rulings on Teaching Origins Science, Law Review Article Finds a Double Standard". Of course, since this post is on the DI's site, it needs to be taken with a large bag of salt.
Before reading their post or even the link to the article itself, I had to wonder about the source. According to the DI, this is article was published in 'a' Law Review. OK, which one? They don't say. Isn't that just the tiniest bit suspicious to you? The link to the article itself is another DI link, not to the source. Normally when quoting an article, you go to the authoritative source, not a copy. Why would the DI not want to identify the source? If it was something like the 'Harvard Law Review', I'm pretty sure it would be a large part of the article, if not the overwhelming content. So, where in the world did casey's little missive get published. It's going to take a little more research on that. In the mean time, here are a few examples of other times the DI tried to hide things. You can check it out while I do a little Googling.
1. First up, back a while ago, in a post "So there is nothing religious about Intelligent Design? Part II" I discussed Heather Zeigler. One of my points was that the DI described her as:
"[NOTE: Today we welcome a new contributing writer to Evolution News & Views, Heather Zeiger. Ms. Zeiger graduated magna cum laude from the University of Texas at Dallas with a B.S. in chemistry and a minor in government and politics. She received her M.S. in chemistry, also from UTD; her research was in organic synthesis and materials.]"and yet forgot to mention all her credentials, like [the bold were the words they used, the rest they forgot to mention. I added the underlines for emphasis]:
"Heather Zeiger graduated magna cum laude from the University of Texas at Dallas with a B.S. in chemistry and a minor in government and politics. She received her M.S. in chemistry, also from UTD; her research was in organic synthesis and materials. She interned at Probe Ministries prior to graduate school and now serves with Probe as a Research Associate. Her interests involve science and culture issues, including bioethics, origins, and the environment. She is currently working on a M.A. in bioethics from Trinity International University. She is married to David, another former Probe intern and teacher at Trinity Christian Academy. "In other words, they decided to not mention that Heather is one who already drank their kool-aid and tried to pass her off as somewhat objective. Of course, when you look at her a little bit closer, you realize that she probably won't be particularly objective at all. I don't think they hired her for her objectivity.
2. A while back the DI discovered the power of polling, we discussed in "A New 'Poll' conducted by the DI says what the DI says, what a surprise!" The DI announced the results of a poll, yet they forget to tell you it was their poll and they worded the questions and twisted the results for their own purposes. In another poll they even forget to tell you what questions were asked ("Another poll from the Discovery Institute, oh boy, oh boy!"), they only presented their spin on the results. Their version of a poll is something like one kid asking another, "Have you stopped beating up your sister? Yes or No."
3. In "Klinghoffer lies by Omission" we discussed a new 'Biography' of Alfred Russel Wallace written by the Michael Flannery. In the piece, little davery klinghoffer described Flannery as:
"Michael A. Flannery is Professor and Associate Director for Historical Collections at the Lister Hill Library of the Health Sciences, University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) and editor of Alfred Russel Wallace's Theory of Intelligent Evolution (2008)."For some reason little davey forgot to mention that Michael Flannery is also Fellow at the Discovery Institute. Now why in the world for davey not bother mentioning that little item? He says so many nice things about Flannery, but not once does he mention that he and Flannery are buddies who share the same political masters, the DI. Why would that be?
4. Sometimes the lie is pretty blatant, like in 2010 when I posted "Intelligent Design, Sh** or get off the Pot!" When Stephen C. Meyer was quoted as saying:
"First, the scientific community is not uniformly opposed to ID. My recent book on the subject received enthusiastic endorsements from many scientists not previously known as advocates of ID, such as chemist Philip Skell, a National Academy of Sciences member, and Norman Nevin, one of Britain's top geneticists."My response back then:
"In my humble opinion Stephen C. Meyer is a liar. According to this quote Meyer states that Philip Skell and Norman Nevin were not previously advocates of Intelligent Design. Let's set the record straight, Skell is a Signatory of the very discredited "A Dissent From Darwinism", the list used in Discovery Institute intelligent design campaigns in an attempt to discredit evolution and bolster claims that intelligent design is scientifically valid by claiming that evolution lacks broad scientific support. Meyer is a liar, Skell may not have published a pro-ID fluff piece, but he is an advocate. Nevin is a supporter of "Truth in Science" a United Kingdom-based organization which promotes the "Teach the Controversy" campaign. It uses this strategy to try to get intelligent design taught alongside evolution in school science lessons."
"At its core, our community is shaped by our commitment to the Gospel – the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. We exist to serve Christ by championing a biblical view of human law and government through our students, graduates, faculty, and staff." (Trinity Law School: About Page)You can check them out in Wikipedia (Trinity Law School), which has a bit more to say like:
"Trinity Law School ranked second on The National Jurist's list of "Most Devout Christian Law Schools,"
"At present, Trinity Law School is not approved by the American Bar Association (ABA)"
"[They are the] publisher of Journal of Christian Legal Thought, a publication of Christian Legal Society"OK, so without even reading little casey's missive, we know that it was published not in a prestigious law review, but a Christian Apologetic version of a law review. No wonder the DI didn't publicize the venue.
So what else does that tell us? I am pretty sure this is going to be nothing more than what casey used to write for the DI. A fluff piece that takes an unsupported, and possibly even unsupportable position and make it sound like ID is not the religious proposition that we all, including the DI, know it is. Anyone want to take a bet on it? OK, this is long enough and it's getting late. I will post again tomorrow after I read the DI post and casey's 'Christian Law Review' article.