In 2002, biology teachers William Buckingham and Alan Bonsell became members of the Dover[1], Pennsylvania school district board of education. For the next two years, they opposed the teaching of Darwin’s theory of evolution as the sole explanation for the origin of life in the ninth-grade curriculum. They argued that students should be given the opportunity to learn about alternative theories as well.
The debates continued for some time until a particular incident escalated tensions: a high school student created a fifteen-foot-long painting that illustrated the gradual evolution from ape to human. The artwork sparked outrage among some members of the board and was burned, further dividing the small community of Dover between those who supported the destruction and those who opposed it.
At a board meeting on June 7, 2004, the use of Kenneth Miller’s biology textbook, Biology, was strongly criticized. The criticism stemmed from the book presenting Darwin’s theory as if it were a proven fact. Professors Buckingham and Bonsell proposed replacing it with Of Pandas and People[2], written by Percival Davis and Dean Kenyon, a book that introduced The Theory of Intelligent Design as an alternative.
After further discussions, the board voted on October 18, 2004, by a margin of 6 to 3, to add the following disclaimer to the ninth-grade science curriculum:
Pennsylvania Academic Standards require students to learn about Darwin’s theory of evolution and eventually be tested on it for graduation.
Darwin’s theory is a theory, not a fact, and continues to be tested as new discoveries challenge its claims. There are gaps in the theory that evidence has not yet filled. A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation that unifies a broad range of observations.
Intelligent design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin’s view. The reference book Of Pandas and People is available for students who wish to explore this theory to understand what intelligent design entails.
As with any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind. The school leaves discussion of the origins of life[3] to each student and their family. As an academic standards-based school district, our class aims to prepare students for proficiency in subjects designated by the Pennsylvania Department of Education.
The three members who voted against the change resigned in protest, and the remaining science teachers refused to read the statement to their students, citing Pennsylvania state code 235.10(2), which prohibits educators from “intentionally and knowingly diverting any topic from the school curriculum.”
Supporters of the text argued that Darwin’s theory contained major gaps, and that this alone justified identifying it as a theory rather than a fact. While they opposed promoting a religious view of life’s origins in a science class, they insisted that students deserved to know that alternative explanations existed.
On December 14, 2004, the American Civil Liberties Union (aclu) and Americans United for Separation of Church and State (au) filed a lawsuit against the Dover School District, representing eleven parents, including Tammy Kitzmiller[4]. Attorney Eric Rothschild, of Pepper Hamilton LLP and a member of the National Center for Science Education (ncse), led the plaintiff’s legal team with full support from the ncse. The case immediately attracted national media attention, with major publications running headlines like Darwin vs. God, Evolution Goes to Trial, and The War on Evolution.
The Thomas More Law Center defended the school board. One of its founders had originally provided Of Pandas and People to Professor Buckingham. Academic support for the defense came from the Discovery Institute[5], whose members also testified during the six-week trial. The defense did not attempt to argue that intelligent design was superior to evolution, but rather that exposing students to the flaws in Darwin’s theory and offering alternative hypotheses would improve their education.
The core idea of intelligent design—first popularized in the 1980s by Phillip Johnson in Darwin on Trial—is that a guided, intelligent cause or agent directed the formation of life. According to this theory, certain biological structures are so complex and interdependent that they could not have emerged through the slow accumulation of random mutations, as Darwin proposed.
One analogy used is that of a mousetrap: for it to function, all its parts must be assembled simultaneously; it could not emerge gradually. Therefore, intelligent design posits that an intelligent agent conceived and organized the system from the start.
The trial, which began on September 26, 2005, was presided over by Judge John E. Jones iii, and since it was a bench trial (without a jury), the courtroom seats were filled by journalists, scientists, writers, and observers from around the world—including Matthew Chapman, great-great-grandson of Charles Darwin.
During the first three weeks, the plaintiffs called numerous biologists, scientists, and authors, all of whom defended Darwin’s theory as a scientific hypothesis supported by a vast body of evidence. One of the key witnesses was Kenneth Miller, author of the textbook in use at Dover High School. In his testimony, Miller emphasized the difference between science and non-science, stating that intelligent design was not demonstrable and thus did not qualify as science.
The most prominent witness for the defense was Michael Behe[6], professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University. In his books and during testimony, Behe described complex biological structures such as the bacterial flagellum[7], which he argued resembled a miniature motor complete with gears, shafts, and bearings, capable of spinning at 100,000 revolutions per minute in both directions. Behe argues that a mechanism like this cannot be explained as the result of the gradual, successive evolution proposed by Darwin, since, for it to function as a propulsion mechanism, all its parts must be operational at the same time. He called this fact “irreducible complexity.”
Behe compared this to systems like the blood clotting mechanism, which requires all seventeen of its components to be present and synchronized. Unlike, for example, a human hand, which can still function with fewer fingers and thus may be explained through gradual evolution, these systems could not function unless all parts existed at once.
On December 20, 2005, Judge John E. Jones iii issued his ruling. He declared that intelligent design was not science, but rather a religious viewpoint disguised as scientific theory. He concluded that the school district’s motivation for including it in the science curriculum was religious in nature, rendering it unconstitutional in public education under the Establishment Clause.
Though the ruling acknowledged flaws in Darwin’s theory and its inability to explain certain biological complexities, it affirmed that this was not justification for teaching unscientific alternatives in science classes.
The ruling drew nationwide praise and landed Judge Jones iii on Time Magazine’s list of the one hundred Most Influential People of 2005.
[1]Dover is a small rural community with just over 20,000 residents, home to numerous Christian fundamentalist churches and a single high school. In this town, the debate between evolution and creationism has persisted for decades, deeply dividing the community between supporters of each perspective.
[2]In its third edition, published in 2007, Of Pandas and People was retitled The Design of Life: Discovering Signs of Intelligence in Biological Systems.
[3]In a 1987 case, the Supreme Court of the United States prohibited the teaching of creationism in public schools, ruling that it violated the constitutional principle of the separation of Church and State.
[4]pbs television network made a two-hour program about this trial, which was titled Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on the Dock. It can be viewed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2xyrel-2vI&index=35&list=WL&t=0s
[5]The Discovery Institute (www.discovery.org) is a non-profit organization founded in 1990 and based in Seattle, Washington. It is considered a conservative think tank and has gained prominence for promoting theories that challenge Darwinian evolution, most notably the theory of Intelligent Design.
[6]Author of the book Darwin’s black box: biochemistry’s challenge to evolution.
[7]A whip-shaped, mobile appendage found in many unicellular organisms, the flagellum serves as a propulsion mechanism, enabling movement through liquid environments.