I guess then, what methodology do you use to exclude the same kind of consideration from Dr. Dembski and others that you used to exclude Eugenia Scotts philosophical and religious comments?
MR. ROTHSCHILD: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: No, I’ll allow the question. The objection is overruled. THE WITNESS: In Dr. Dembski’s case, it is not a matter of his having a scientific viewpoint which can be defended and a philosophical viewpoint attached to that. His viewpoint regarding intelligent design is at its core, in its essence, a religious viewpoint, not a scientific one. What I object to is his presenting that as a scientific theory that should be offered to students in a science class. I don’t think there is any analogy at all between what he is doing and what Eugenia Scott does. And part of my job as a philosopher is to make those distinctionss clear. BY MR.
