In Dover, the TMLC lawyer and Dis­cov­ery Insti­tute are at odds:

Out­side Harrisburg’s fed­er­al cour­t­house last week, [the TMLC lawyer defend­ing the Dover school board] said his abil­i­ty to devel­op a case in this First Amend­ment law­suit has been dam­aged by the Dis­cov­ery Institute’s strat­e­gy of back­ing off in the face of pub­lic criticism.

And, he said, Dis­cov­ery fel­lows are wrong when they explain their position.

So the defense is accus­ing DI of being liars and wimps. 

Meow!

In oth­er news,

[Dover school board mem­ber] Ms. Geesey fol­lowed the reporters on the stand. Parts of her tes­ti­mo­ny bore a strik­ing­ly sim­i­lar­i­ty to that of Supt. Nilsen the pre­vi­ous week. Both admit­ted that their sole sources of knowl­edge about intel­li­gent design — includ­ing their belief that it is “sci­en­tif­ic” — were board mem­bers William Buck­ing­ham and Alan Bon­sell. They also chose to believe these board mem­bers — who both wit­ness­es admit have “no sci­ence back­ground” — over the school dis­tric­t’s own biol­o­gy teach­ers. Nei­ther found it nec­es­sary to do any research on their own about the pro­posed addi­tion to the curriculum.

Can they pos­si­bly win? Buck­ing­ham is the genius who watched him­self talk about teach­ing cre­ation­ism and then denied ever advo­cat­ing teach­ing cre­ation­ism. Bon­sell is the bright light who said (accord­ing to anoth­er Board member:

he did not believe in evo­lu­tion and if evo­lu­tion was part of the biol­o­gy cur­ricu­lum, cre­ation­ism had to be shared 50–50

These were the Board­’s experts.

Mean­while, Bil­ly Dem­b­s­ki is spend­ing his effort spin­ning con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries about the rebut­tal wit­ness who pulled out when Bil­ly chick­ened out.

Good times.