Re: Wiki edit for the Phillip Johnson page

On 8/4/2024 1:25 PM, RonO wrote:

The Phillip Johnson wiki page has been edited and the quote from the Berkeley Science Review where he admitted that there was no theory of intelligent design has been removed.
 This is the WayBack link that works:
http://web.archive.org/web/20070609131601/http://sciencereview.berkeley.edu/articles.php?issue=10&article=evolution
 QUOTE:
I also don’t think that there is really a theory of intelligent design
at the present time to propose as a comparable alternative to the
Darwinian theory, which is, whatever errors it might contain, a fully
worked out scheme. There is no intelligent design theory that’s
comparable. Working out a positive theory is the job of the scientific
people that we have affiliated with the movement. Some of them are quite
convinced that it’s doable, but that’s for them to prove…No product is
ready for competition in the educational world.
END QUOTE:
 Johnson made the admission in 2006 after the Dover fiasco.  The ID perps tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover creationist rubes, but the ID perp responsible for making sure that the bait and switch went down dropped the ball, and did not follow up after telling the Dover rubes not to teach intelligent design, but they should try the obfuscation and denial switch scam instead.  The Dover rubes did not take his advice and tried to teach the junk anyways.  Phillip Johnson had, had the bait and switch run on him the first time in 2002 in Ohio.  Both He and then senator Santorum were all for getting ID taught in the Ohio public schools, but Meyer, Wells and a few others decided to start running the bait and switch instead of giving the rubes any ID science to teach (Wells included the decision to start running the bait and switch in his report on the Ohio fiasco).  The bait and switch went down on every group of creationist rubes that wanted to teach the scam junk for the next 3 years, but Johnson still came forward and supported teaching the ID scam junk in Dover.  He sat in the court room every day of testimony, and after that experience gave the Berkeley Science Review interview.
 The quote has been removed from the wiki artlcle for some reason.  It isn't controversial.  Johnson never claimed otherwise.  After publication I think that the Panda's Thumb was the first discussion group to put up the Johnson admission, and as far as I know Johnson never changed his mind.
 Ron Okimoto
 

https://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/01/intelligent-des-43.html
I think that this is where I first got the Johnson quote from at Panda's Thumb.  The link PvM used no longer works and you need to use the Wayback link I put in above.  It also has the Nelson 2004 quote, and I recall Nelson making similar claims back in 2002 when the bait and switch started.
Ken Miller used the quote in a 2009 power point presentation.
https://www.toxicology.org/groups/rc/nesot/docs/09Miller.pdf
I do not recall Johnson ever retracting the statement, and it means just what he is quoted as saying because he follows up with his claims that teaching ID in the public schools is no longer a viable option, and that he is relieved that it is all over.
I used to put up both quotes.
QUOTE:
I also don’t think that there is really a theory of intelligent
design at the present time to propose as a comparable alternative
to the Darwinian theory, which is, whatever errors it might
contain, a fully worked out scheme. There is no intelligent design
theory that’s comparable. Working out a positive theory is the job
of the scientific people that we have affiliated with the movement.
Some of them are quite convinced that it’s doable, but that’s for
them to prove…No product is ready for competition in the educational
world.
END QUOTE:
QUOTE:
For his part, Johnson agrees: “I think the fat lady has sung for any
efforts to change the approach in the public schools…the courts are
just not going to allow it. They never have. The efforts to change things in the public schools generate more powerful opposition than accomplish anything…I don’t think that means the end of the issue at all.”
“In some respects,” he later goes on, “I’m almost relieved, and
glad. I think the issue is properly settled. It’s clear to me now that the public schools are not going to change their line in my lifetime. That isn’t to me where the action really is and ought to be.”
END QUOTE:
I should note that to me, in the last quote, Johnson was admitting that he was trying to get Biblical creationism taught in the public schools with his reference to past court cases that could only be the creationism cases.
Ron Okimoto