There seems to be resistance to coping with what the ID scam has pretty
much always been on TO. ID did not become the major topic of TO until
after the bait and switch started to go down in 2002. Before that it
was still usually business as usual for the YEC scientific creationist
types. For over two decades all the ID perps have used the ID "science"
for is as bait to push off the obfuscation and denial switch scam onto
IDiotic creationist rubes who are stupid and dishonest enough to
consider the ID scam as a viable means to support their religious
beliefs. It is a not any type of controversy that IDiots were just
basically converted scientific creationist types that had finally given
up on the failure of scientific creationism. The Reason to believe old
earth creationists started to claim that they supported the ID scam, but
they did not want to teach the junk in the public schools. Most of the
ID perps were old earth Biblical creationists, but their major support
base were the same YEC that had supported the scientific creationist
effort. The rubes that bent over for the switch scam were mostly YEC in
Ohio, Texas, and Louisiana. The Kansas IDiotic Kangaroo court in 2005
was instigated by some of the same YEC School board members that had
been responsible for the 1999 Kansas effort to remove biological
evolution and other science topics like the Big Bang and radio isotopes
from the science standards, but back in 1999 they were still using
Hovind as their science adviser. TO regulars can't seem to get past the
truth that the ID perps have been perpetrating the dishonest bait and
switch scam, and the creationist rubes have been IDiots for thinking
that the scam could be viable for over 2 decades.

It has been obvious that telling the truth has never affected the ID
scam on TO. Glenn became an IDiot after I started calling things what
they were. Glenn was fully aware of what was going on, but became an
IDiot anyway. By the time that I started calling things what they were
the bait and switch had been going down for around 3 years. The ID
perps used to maintain a list of creationist rube school boards and
legislators that they had run the bait and switch on. There may have
been 20 to 30 bait and switch examples on that list by the time that
Dover hit the fan. They claimed that those IDiots on the list were
still considering implementing the switch scam, but only Ohio did that
before the Dover fiasco occurred. Nearly all the creationist rubes did
not implement the obfuscation and denial switch scam because the
creationist rubes never liked the switch scam. They never wanted to
teach their kids enough science so that they would understand what they
needed to deny. After Dover the Ohio IDiots dropped the switch scam.
Louisiana and Texas had, had the bait and switch run on them before
Dover, but both states could not decide if they wanted to teach the
obfuscation and denial switch scam. Both states diddle farted around
with the switch scam notions for years before Louisiana finally passed
their switch scam legislation in 2008, but then they did nothing with it because creationists really do not want to teach anything about the
science that they want their kids to be in denial of.

Probably due to the Louisiana switch scam publicity the creationist
rubes in Florida tried to teach ID in their public schools. I recall 9
county school boards claiming to want to teach ID, and ID scam
legislation being proposed by the State's legislators in 2009. The ID
perps had to send a team from the Discovery Institute to invade the
state in order to run the bait and switch on all the Florida IDiotic creationist rubes. The Florida creationist rubes dropped the issue
instead of bending over for the switch scam. Even after the massive
display of the bait and switch tactics of the ID perps in Florida,
Louisiana tried to use the switch scam legislation to teach ID in their
public schools. The ID perps had told them that the switch scam had
nothing to do with any ID nor creation science, but the Louisiana IDiots
were obviously lying about why they passed the stupid legislation. The
ID perps had to run the bait and switch on the Louisiana rubes for a
second time in 2010. The IDiots in Texas had diddle farted around with
the switch scam for years, and had gone through waffling cycles of
considering implementing the switch scam or doing other things like
dropping the topics that they didn't want their kids to understand out
of the state science standards. After the second bait and switch on
Louisiana the Texas IDiots finally got around to implementing the switch
scam through the state board of education, but no one wanted to teach
the kids the science denial if they could not tell them why they had to
deny it. It wasn't until 2013 that both Texas and Louisiana attempted
to implement the switch scam by, again, trying to teach the ID nonsense.
This time both states claimed that they were not requiring teaching
the ID nonsense, but were just providing teachers with the means to
teach ID if they wanted to (it should be noted that the Louisiana IDiots
called what they wanted to teach both intelligent design and creationism
in their textbook supplements).

Since Dover the ID perps had been claiming that ID could be taught in
the public schools, but that the ID perps did not support "requiring" ID
to be taught, but the ID perps ran the bait and switch on Louisiana for
the third time, and Texas for the second time even though both states
were not requiring ID to be taught. The ID perps removed the paragraph
that contained the "require" claim from their education policy that they
had up on their web site, but they did not remove the paragraph from the
same education policy that they had in their teach ID scam propaganda
that they were still selling to the rubes. The bait and switch
continued to go down. As sad as it may be, at the same time that the ID
perps were posting their Top Six in Nov. 2017, they were also running
the bait and switch on the Utah creationist rubes. A few months later
there was a follow up article on their creationist news site complaining
that the Utah rubes had not bent over for the switch scam, and had
dropped the issue.

I think that Tennessee also adopted the switch scam after Dover, but no
one ever hears about them because that is all they did, and they never
wanted to implement it. It seems to be a fact that creationist rubes
that have wanted to teach creationism in the public schools do not want
to teach their kids enough science for them to understand what they have
to deny. If they can't tell the kids why the denial is necessary they
would rather keep the kids as ignorant as possible about the subject.

Everyone understood what was happening, but no one seemed to want to acknowledge reality. When the bait and switch was confirmed to have
gone down on the Ohio IDiots, there were still IDiotic creationist rubes
at ARN that believed that the ID science would be taught in Ohio. When
the Ohio rubes implemented the switch scam (2003) and expunged all
references to the ID scam from the initial draft of their model lesson
plan the bait and switch had become a reality for everyone. The switch
scam really could not mention that ID had ever existed. Mike Gene was
the only one that was able to face reality, and he just claimed that he
had given up on teaching the IDiotic junk back in 1999. All the other
IDiots just tried to pretend that it had never happened. This did not
stop Mike Gene from continuing to support the ID scam and the bait and
switch. Mike Gene would not admit that the ID science had never existed
until he quit the ID scam in 2007. TO was informed of the event because
the IDiots at Uncommon descent derided Mike Gene for giving up. Mike
Gene was considered to be among the most scientifically inclined of the
IDiots. His issue had always been that he wasn't any more honest about
the ID science than the rest of the IDiots.

I have recently had to put up the evidence that the bait and switch that
the ID perps have been running on the IDiotic creationist rubes since
Ohio in 2002 was common knowledge among the creationists that wanted to
teach creationism in the public schools, but for some reason they still supported the ID scam. During the Dover fiasco a Thomas More lawyer
claimed that he understood what the ID perps had been doing for years,
but he called it a strategy instead of the bait and switch scam that it was.

https://groups.google.com/g/talk.origins/c/tdHQ6mZyYNA/m/HYOWM42-BQAJ

Inserted QUOTE:
The Thomas More Lawyer knew this had been going on for years but he
called it a "strategy" instead of the scam that it was.

https://ncse.ngo/discovery-institute-and-thomas-more-law-center-squabble-aei-forum

It had participants laughing, and you can read the NCSE article to get
the whole story, but the Thomas More Lawyer not only demonstrated that
the ID perps had been selling the teach ID scam, he described what they
had been doing since Ohio in 2002.

QUOTE:
RICHARD THOMPSON (TMLC): They wrote a book, titled "Intelligent Design
in Public School Science Curricula." The conclusion of that book was
that, um:

"Moreover, as the previous discussion demonstrates, school boards have
the authority to permit, and even encourage, teaching about design
theory as an alternative to Darwinian evolution -- and this includes the
use of textbooks such as Of Pandas and People that present evidence for
the theory of intelligent design." ...and I could go further. But, you
had Discovery Institute people actually encouraging the teaching of
intelligent design in public school systems. Now, whether they wanted
the school boards to teach intelligent design or mention it, certainly
when you start putting it in writing, that writing does have consequences.

In fact, several of the members, including Steve Meyer, agreed to be
expert witnesses, also prepared expert witness reports, then all at once decided that they weren't going to become expert witnesses, at a time
after the closure of the time we could add new expert witnesses. So it
did have a strategic impact on the way we could present the case, cause
they backed out, when the court no longer allowed us to add new expert witnesses, which we could have done.

Now, Stephen Meyer, you know, wanted his attorney there, we said because
he was an officer of the Discovery Institute, he certainly could have
his attorney there. But the other experts wanted to have attorneys, that
they were going to consult with, as objections were made, and not with
us. And no other expert that was in the Dover case, and I'm talking
about the plaintiffs, had any attorney representing them.

So that caused us some concern about exactly where was the heart of the Discovery Institute. Was it really something of a tactical decision, was
it this strategy that they've been using, in I guess Ohio and other
places, where they've pushed school boards to go in with intelligent
design, and as soon as there's a controversy, they back off with a
compromise. And I think what was victimized by this strategy was the
Dover school board, because we could not present the expert testimony we thought we could present
END QUOTE:

"Was it really something of a tactical decision, was it this strategy
that they've been using, in I guess Ohio and other places, where they've
pushed school boards to go in with intelligent design, and as soon as
there's a controversy, they back off with a compromise."

The More lawyer was fully aware that the ID perps had been running the
bait and switch because it had gone down every single time that any
rubes had wanted to teach the junk. No one has ever gotten any ID
science to teach from the ID perps. All the ID perps have ever used ID
for is as bait to run in the switch scam on the hapless IDiotic
creationist rubes.

The ID perps knew what they were doing. Wells wrote up a report on the
first bait and switch scam on Ohio and claimed in the report that it was decided before they gave their dog and pony show supporting ID that they
would not propose teaching the junk, and instead offer the rubes the
switch scam. Phillip Johnson had made teaching ID in the public schools
part of his Wedge strategy, but when it came time to put up or shut up
they started running the bait and switch.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110814145400/http:/www.creationists.org/archived-obsolete-pages/2002-03-11-OSBE-wells.html

QUOTE:
Steve Meyer and I (in consultation with others) had decided ahead of
time that we would not push for including intelligent design (ID) in the
state science standards, but would propose instead that the standards
include language protecting teachers who choose to teach the controversy.
END QUOTE:
END inserted QUOTE:

I should note that the booklet that the More lawyer quoted from used to
be given out by the ID perps with their Wedge video before the bait and
switch started to go down in 2002. As noted the authors were all
associated with the Discovery Institute. The booklet was still
available to download for free from the Discovery Institute web site,
but you had to pay for a hard copy during, and for sometime after the
Dover Fiasco. I have used WayBack archive to go back to the Discovery Institute web pages from 2005 and have been able to download a copy of
the booklet using those old links.

http://arn.org/docs/dewolf/guidebook.htm

It is a reflection on the ethics of the Thomas More lawyer that he would consider the ID perp's bait and switch scam as a legitimate strategy.
He obviously knew what the ID perps were doing by selling the rubes
intelligent design science, and then only giving them something that
they never wanted, but he maintained his support for teaching
creationism in the public schools, and was willing to defend the ID scam
in Federal court. The bait and switch had gone down in every single
instance that IDiotic creationist rubes had wanted to teach the junk.
Dover was the first and only total failure of the bait and switch
strategy. Only a few IDiotic creationist rubes have bent over for the
switch scam. The vast majority that have had the bait and switch run on
them have dropped the issue. The ID perps have been the major force
keeping creationism out of the public schools for over 2 decades. The
IDiotic type creationists do not listen to the science side, but they
will listen to the scam artists who sold them the scam. It took a highly incompetent and morally bankrupt group of creationist rubes to not heed
what the ID perps told them, and tried to teach the junk anyway in Dover.

Everyone should recall that when the Dover fiasco started the ID perps
tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover creationist rubes. The Kitzmiller vs Dover Wiki has the account of how the Discovery Institute
tried to dissuade the Dover rubes from teaching intelligent design, and
instead offered them switch scam material (Wells' "Icons of Evolution"
is considered by the ID perps to represent the switch scam type of
denial, and it was used by the Ohio rubes to create their switch scam
lesson plan. It should be noted that even though the book "Icons of
Evolution" had been used to create the lesson plan the citation was
deleted from the draft copy of the Ohio lesson plan in order to expunge
all reference to ID perps in the final copy.).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District

The bait and switch also went down on ex Senator Santorum for the second
time. Santorum had allowed Phillip Johnson to draft the "amendment" to
the No child left behind bill. The written support for teaching
intelligent design in the public schools eventually found it's way into
the appendix of the bill, and was hailed by the ID perps as a
significant achievement. Santorum supported the Ohio IDiots in their
efforts to teach intelligent design in 2002, and the ID perps ran the
bait and switch on Santorum along with the other IDiotic creationist
rubes.

When the Dover fiasco broke into national news Santorum initially
supported the effort in his home state, but then the Discovery Institute
began running the bait and switch. During Santorum's reelection
campaign Santorum flip-flopped on the issue and began claiming that he
did not support teaching intelligent design in Dover. The other
Republican candidates in the primaries took advantage of this and
questioned Santorum's religious convictions. Yes, as stupid as it may
be the other Republican candidates also knew that intelligent design was supporting Biblical creationism. Santorum lost his bid to be reelected
to the Senate, and when he ran for President he was no longer an IDiot,
and claimed that he supported plain old Biblical creationism.

There is no doubt that the ID scam unit at the Discovery Institute has
been selling the rubes the lie that the ID science could be taught in
the public schools. It was part of the Wedge strategy that Phillip
Johnson is supposed to have developed for the ID scam, and the ID perps
doubled down on the stupidity when they put out their teach ID scam
propaganda after their Dover loss in Federal court, and they keep
updating that junk about every 3 years.

This is still up at the ID perp's web site. It had been updated in
2021, but it looks like they subsequently reformated the site and seem
to have reverted to the 2018 version. It doesn't matter because the
basic teach ID scam nonsense had not changed.

https://www.discovery.org/f/1453/

It is just a fact that the ID perps have been worse than perps and
IDiots only wish that they had the excuse of being idiots. If anyone
has any alternative reality that they want to put up, my guess is that
all of what I have claimed can still be documented, and the historical
reality should be established since ID seems to have died on TO, and a
lot of the TO regulars seem to not understand what happened.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sunday, November 12, 2023 at 6:11:38 PM UTC-5, RonO wrote:

.... a long-winded spiel. It used to be that one could get a line count on Old Google Groups
and perhaps also the first New Google Groups, but the latest version has
no such thing. Not being very good at estimating such numbers,
all I can say for sure is that I deleted more than 300 lines -- however many they are,
it was the entire text.

I am only interested in the title, which means something utterly different
to most t.o. participants, to Larry Moran of Sandwalk,
to Wikipedia, to NAS, and to most other mainstream science popularizers,
than it does to me.

Namely, "intelligent design creationism," which I interpret literally,
is a very small intersection between science-grounded ID
[foremost practitioner: Michael Behe] and creationism
[against which Behe has written in at least two of his books].

I wonder whether anyone else reading this post looks upon the phrase in that literal sense.

I doubt it: most creationists are religiously and politically motivated,
just as are most t.o. participants, although the religious motivations
of the overwhelming majority of t.o. regulars are in an utterly different direction.
This includes Ron Okimoto, of course.


Peter Nyikos
Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
University of South Carolina
https://people.math.sc.edu/nyikos

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 11/15/23 4:40 PM, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:

On Sunday, November 12, 2023 at 6:11:38 PM UTC-5, RonO wrote:

.... a long-winded spiel. It used to be that one could get a line count on Old Google Groups
and perhaps also the first New Google Groups, but the latest version has
no such thing. Not being very good at estimating such numbers,
all I can say for sure is that I deleted more than 300 lines -- however many they are,
it was the entire text.

I am only interested in the title, which means something utterly different
to most t.o. participants, to Larry Moran of Sandwalk,
to Wikipedia, to NAS, and to most other mainstream science popularizers,
than it does to me.

Namely, "intelligent design creationism," which I interpret literally,
is a very small intersection between science-grounded ID
[foremost practitioner: Michael Behe] and creationism
[against which Behe has written in at least two of his books].

I'm curious: what has Behe said about creationists?

Of course the intersection is much larger than you allege here, granting
for the moment that there really is any such thing as "science-grounded
ID". Most prominent IDers other than Behe and Denton are creationists of
some recognizable stripe, though many are coy.

I wonder whether anyone else reading this post looks upon the phrase in that literal sense.

I doubt it: most creationists are religiously and politically motivated,
just as are most t.o. participants, although the religious motivations
of the overwhelming majority of t.o. regulars are in an utterly different direction.
This includes Ron Okimoto, of course.

I think you are confused about the motivations of most participants.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 11/16/23 8:17 AM, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, November 15, 2023 at 9:06:41 PM UTC-5, John Harshman wrote:

On 11/15/23 4:40 PM, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:

On Sunday, November 12, 2023 at 6:11:38 PM UTC-5, RonO wrote:

.... a long-winded spiel. It used to be that one could get a line count on Old Google Groups
and perhaps also the first New Google Groups, but the latest version has >>> no such thing. Not being very good at estimating such numbers,
all I can say for sure is that I deleted more than 300 lines -- however many they are,
it was the entire text.

I am only interested in the title, which means something utterly different >>> to most t.o. participants, to Larry Moran of Sandwalk,
to Wikipedia, to NAS, and to most other mainstream science popularizers, >>> than it does to me.

Namely, "intelligent design creationism," which I interpret literally,
is a very small intersection between science-grounded ID
[foremost practitioner: Michael Behe] and creationism
[against which Behe has written in at least two of his books].

I'm curious: what has Behe said about creationists?

I've never seen him say anything negative about them
as a whole. And if he's said anything negative about
any individual creationists, I've missed it.

This shouldn't be hard for you to understand. After all,
I've never seen you say anything negative about Ron Okimoto
to anyone else. OTOH it's been at least a decade since you've sided
with him against me on anything.

OK, let me modify the question, since you seem to have misunderstood it.
What has Behe written in at least two of his books against creationism?

Of course the intersection is much larger than you allege here, granting
for the moment that there really is any such thing as "science-grounded
ID".

It's bad form to preface an illogical statement like that with "Of course." After claiming that the intersection is much larger, you express
skepticism about whether one of the intersecting things exists at all.

It's bad form to claim that a statement is illogical without explaining
what's wrong with it. And I was accepting for the moment your
characterization of some IDers, as I explicitly stated.

Most prominent IDers other than Behe and Denton are creationists of
some recognizable stripe, though many are coy.

You fail to name a single one, irrespective of whether their ID stance is science-based or not.

I had assumed you would know of some. You don't? I refer to Meyer,
Wells, Nelson, O'Leary, etc. Who do you think the "scientific" IDers are
aside from Behe and Denton?

Right now, I only care whether there are any avowed creationists
doing articles for Evolution News, and whether any of them did an article espousing creationism.

Let's count any article casting doubt on common descent, shall we? There
are many of those. Or is that something else you deny exists?

I wonder whether anyone else reading this post looks upon the phrase in that literal sense.

I doubt it: most creationists are religiously and politically motivated, >>> just as are most t.o. participants, although the religious motivations
of the overwhelming majority of t.o. regulars are in an utterly different direction.
This includes Ron Okimoto, of course.

I think you are confused about the motivations of most participants.

Why, did a sizable number email you about their religious or political motivations?

So you are free to infer motivations from posts, while I need direct statements? That's an interesting standard you have there, or perhaps
two standards.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, November 15, 2023 at 9:06:41 PM UTC-5, John Harshman wrote:

On 11/15/23 4:40 PM, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:

On Sunday, November 12, 2023 at 6:11:38 PM UTC-5, RonO wrote:

.... a long-winded spiel. It used to be that one could get a line count on Old Google Groups
and perhaps also the first New Google Groups, but the latest version has no such thing. Not being very good at estimating such numbers,
all I can say for sure is that I deleted more than 300 lines -- however many they are,
it was the entire text.

I am only interested in the title, which means something utterly different to most t.o. participants, to Larry Moran of Sandwalk,
to Wikipedia, to NAS, and to most other mainstream science popularizers, than it does to me.

Namely, "intelligent design creationism," which I interpret literally,
is a very small intersection between science-grounded ID
[foremost practitioner: Michael Behe] and creationism
[against which Behe has written in at least two of his books].

I'm curious: what has Behe said about creationists?

I've never seen him say anything negative about them
as a whole. And if he's said anything negative about
any individual creationists, I've missed it.

This shouldn't be hard for you to understand. After all,
I've never seen you say anything negative about Ron Okimoto
to anyone else. OTOH it's been at least a decade since you've sided
with him against me on anything.

Of course the intersection is much larger than you allege here, granting
for the moment that there really is any such thing as "science-grounded
ID".

It's bad form to preface an illogical statement like that with "Of course." After claiming that the intersection is much larger, you express
skepticism about whether one of the intersecting things exists at all.

Most prominent IDers other than Behe and Denton are creationists of
some recognizable stripe, though many are coy.

You fail to name a single one, irrespective of whether their ID stance is science-based or not.

Right now, I only care whether there are any avowed creationists
doing articles for Evolution News, and whether any of them did an article espousing creationism.

I wonder whether anyone else reading this post looks upon the phrase in that literal sense.

I doubt it: most creationists are religiously and politically motivated, just as are most t.o. participants, although the religious motivations
of the overwhelming majority of t.o. regulars are in an utterly different direction.
This includes Ron Okimoto, of course.

I think you are confused about the motivations of most participants.

Why, did a sizable number email you about their religious or political motivations?


Peter Nyikos

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 11/12/2023 5:10 PM, RonO wrote:

There seems to be resistance to coping with what the ID scam has pretty
much always been on TO.  ID did not become the major topic of TO until
after the bait and switch started to go down in 2002.  Before that it
was still usually business as usual for the YEC scientific creationist types.  For over two decades all the ID perps have used the ID "science"
for is as bait to push off the obfuscation and denial switch scam onto IDiotic creationist rubes who are stupid and dishonest enough to
consider the ID scam as a viable means to support their religious
beliefs.  It is a not any type of controversy that IDiots were just basically converted scientific creationist types that had finally given
up on the failure of scientific creationism.  The Reason to believe old earth creationists started to claim that they supported the ID scam, but
they did not want to teach the junk in the public schools.  Most of the
ID perps were old earth Biblical creationists, but their major support
base were the same YEC that had supported the scientific creationist effort.  The rubes that bent over for the switch scam were mostly YEC in Ohio, Texas, and Louisiana.  The Kansas IDiotic Kangaroo court in 2005
was instigated by some of the same YEC School board members that had
been responsible for the 1999 Kansas effort to remove biological
evolution and other science topics like the Big Bang and radio isotopes
from the science standards, but back in 1999 they were still using
Hovind as their science adviser.  TO regulars can't seem to get past the truth that the ID perps have been perpetrating the dishonest bait and
switch scam, and the creationist rubes have been IDiots for thinking
that the scam could be viable for over 2 decades.

It has been obvious that telling the truth has never affected the ID
scam on TO.  Glenn became an IDiot after I started calling things what
they were.  Glenn was fully aware of what was going on, but became an
IDiot anyway.  By the time that I started calling things what they were
the bait and switch had been going down for around 3 years.  The ID
perps used to maintain a list of creationist rube school boards and legislators that they had run the bait and switch on.  There may have
been 20 to 30 bait and switch examples on that list by the time that
Dover hit the fan.  They claimed that those IDiots on the list were
still considering implementing the switch scam, but only Ohio did that
before the Dover fiasco occurred.  Nearly all the creationist rubes did
not implement the obfuscation and denial switch scam because the
creationist rubes never liked the switch scam.  They never wanted to
teach their kids enough science so that they would understand what they needed to deny.  After Dover the Ohio IDiots dropped the switch scam. Louisiana and Texas had, had the bait and switch run on them before
Dover, but both states could not decide if they wanted to teach the obfuscation and denial switch scam. Both states diddle farted around
with the switch scam notions for years before Louisiana finally passed
their switch scam legislation in 2008, but then they did nothing with it because creationists really do not want to teach anything about the
science that they want their kids to be in denial of.

Probably due to the Louisiana switch scam publicity the creationist
rubes in Florida tried to teach ID in their public schools.  I recall 9 county school boards claiming to want to teach ID, and ID scam
legislation being proposed by the State's legislators in 2009.  The ID
perps had to send a team from the Discovery Institute to invade the
state in order to run the bait and switch on all the Florida IDiotic creationist rubes.  The Florida creationist rubes dropped the issue
instead of bending over for the switch scam.  Even after the massive
display of the bait and switch tactics of the ID perps in Florida,
Louisiana tried to use the switch scam legislation to teach ID in their public schools.  The ID perps had told them that the switch scam had
nothing to do with any ID nor creation science, but the Louisiana IDiots
were obviously lying about why they passed the stupid legislation.  The
ID perps had to run the bait and switch on the Louisiana rubes for a
second time in 2010.  The IDiots in Texas had diddle farted around with
the switch scam for years, and had gone through waffling cycles of considering implementing the switch scam or doing other things like
dropping the topics that they didn't want their kids to understand out
of the state science standards.  After the second bait and switch on Louisiana the Texas IDiots finally got around to implementing the switch
scam through the state board of education, but no one wanted to teach
the kids the science denial if they could not tell them why they had to
deny it.  It wasn't until 2013 that both Texas and Louisiana attempted
to implement the switch scam by, again, trying to teach the ID nonsense.
 This time both states claimed that they were not requiring teaching
the ID nonsense, but were just providing teachers with the means to
teach ID if they wanted to (it should be noted that the Louisiana IDiots called what they wanted to teach both intelligent design and creationism
in their textbook supplements).

Since Dover the ID perps had been claiming that ID could be taught in
the public schools, but that the ID perps did not support "requiring" ID
to be taught, but the ID perps ran the bait and switch on Louisiana for
the third time, and Texas for the second time even though both states
were not requiring ID to be taught.  The ID perps removed the paragraph
that contained the "require" claim from their education policy that they
had up on their web site, but they did not remove the paragraph from the
same education policy that they had in their teach ID scam propaganda
that they were still selling to the rubes.  The bait and switch
continued to go down.  As sad as it may be, at the same time that the ID perps were posting their Top Six in Nov. 2017, they were also running
the bait and switch on the Utah creationist rubes.  A few months later
there was a follow up article on their creationist news site complaining
that the Utah rubes had not bent over for the switch scam, and had
dropped the issue.

I think that Tennessee also adopted the switch scam after Dover, but no
one ever hears about them because that is all they did, and they never
wanted to implement it.  It seems to be a fact that creationist rubes
that have wanted to teach creationism in the public schools do not want
to teach their kids enough science for them to understand what they have
to deny.  If they can't tell the kids why the denial is necessary they
would rather keep the kids as ignorant as possible about the subject.

Everyone understood what was happening, but no one seemed to want to acknowledge reality.  When the bait and switch was confirmed to have
gone down on the Ohio IDiots, there were still IDiotic creationist rubes
at ARN that believed that the ID science would be taught in Ohio.  When
the Ohio rubes implemented the switch scam (2003) and expunged all
references to the ID scam from the initial draft of their model lesson
plan the bait and switch had become a reality for everyone.  The switch
scam really could not mention that ID had ever existed.  Mike Gene was
the only one that was able to face reality, and he just claimed that he
had given up on teaching the IDiotic junk back in 1999.  All the other IDiots just tried to pretend that it had never happened.  This did not
stop Mike Gene from continuing to support the ID scam and the bait and switch.  Mike Gene would not admit that the ID science had never existed until he quit the ID scam in 2007.  TO was informed of the event because
the IDiots at Uncommon descent derided Mike Gene for giving up.  Mike
Gene was considered to be among the most scientifically inclined of the IDiots.  His issue had always been that he wasn't any more honest about
the ID science than the rest of the IDiots.

I have recently had to put up the evidence that the bait and switch that
the ID perps have been running on the IDiotic creationist rubes since
Ohio in 2002 was common knowledge among the creationists that wanted to
teach creationism in the public schools, but for some reason they still supported the ID scam.  During the Dover fiasco a Thomas More lawyer
claimed that he understood what the ID perps had been doing for years,
but he called it a strategy instead of the bait and switch scam that it
was.

https://groups.google.com/g/talk.origins/c/tdHQ6mZyYNA/m/HYOWM42-BQAJ

Inserted QUOTE:
The Thomas More Lawyer knew this had been going on for years but he
called it a "strategy" instead of the scam that it was.

https://ncse.ngo/discovery-institute-and-thomas-more-law-center-squabble-aei-forum

It had participants laughing, and you can read the NCSE article to get
the whole story, but the Thomas More Lawyer not only demonstrated that
the ID perps had been selling the teach ID scam, he described what they
had been doing since Ohio in 2002.

QUOTE:
RICHARD THOMPSON (TMLC): They wrote a book, titled "Intelligent Design
in Public School Science Curricula." The conclusion of that book was
that, um:

"Moreover, as the previous discussion demonstrates, school boards have
the authority to permit, and even encourage, teaching about design
theory as an alternative to Darwinian evolution -- and this includes the
use of textbooks such as Of Pandas and People that present evidence for
the theory of intelligent design." ...and I could go further. But, you
had Discovery Institute people actually encouraging the teaching of intelligent design in public school systems. Now, whether they wanted
the school boards to teach intelligent design or mention it, certainly
when you start putting it in writing, that writing does have consequences.

In fact, several of the members, including Steve Meyer, agreed to be
expert witnesses, also prepared expert witness reports, then all at once decided that they weren't going to become expert witnesses, at a time
after the closure of the time we could add new expert witnesses. So it
did have a strategic impact on the way we could present the case, cause
they backed out, when the court no longer allowed us to add new expert witnesses, which we could have done.

Now, Stephen Meyer, you know, wanted his attorney there, we said because
he was an officer of the Discovery Institute, he certainly could have
his attorney there. But the other experts wanted to have attorneys, that
they were going to consult with, as objections were made, and not with
us. And no other expert that was in the Dover case, and I'm talking
about the plaintiffs, had any attorney representing them.

So that caused us some concern about exactly where was the heart of the Discovery Institute. Was it really something of a tactical decision, was
it this strategy that they've been using, in I guess Ohio and other
places, where they've pushed school boards to go in with intelligent
design, and as soon as there's a controversy, they back off with a compromise. And I think what was victimized by this strategy was the
Dover school board, because we could not present the expert testimony we thought we could present
END QUOTE:

"Was it really something of a tactical decision, was it this strategy
that they've been using, in I guess Ohio and other places, where they've pushed school boards to go in with intelligent design, and as soon as
there's a controversy, they back off with a compromise."

The More lawyer was fully aware that the ID perps had been running the
bait and switch because it had gone down every single time that any
rubes had wanted to teach the junk. No one has ever gotten any ID
science to teach from the ID perps. All the ID perps have ever used ID
for is as bait to run in the switch scam on the hapless IDiotic
creationist rubes.

The ID perps knew what they were doing. Wells wrote up a report on the
first bait and switch scam on Ohio and claimed in the report that it was decided before they gave their dog and pony show supporting ID that they would not propose teaching the junk, and instead offer the rubes the
switch scam. Phillip Johnson had made teaching ID in the public schools
part of his Wedge strategy, but when it came time to put up or shut up
they started running the bait and switch.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110814145400/http:/www.creationists.org/archived-obsolete-pages/2002-03-11-OSBE-wells.html

QUOTE:
Steve Meyer and I (in consultation with others) had decided ahead of
time that we would not push for including intelligent design (ID) in the state science standards, but would propose instead that the standards
include language protecting teachers who choose to teach the controversy.
END QUOTE:
END inserted QUOTE:

I should note that the booklet that the More lawyer quoted from used to
be given out by the ID perps with their Wedge video before the bait and switch started to go down in 2002.  As noted the authors were all
associated with the Discovery Institute.  The booklet was still
available to download for free from the Discovery Institute web site,
but you had to pay for a hard copy during, and for sometime after the
Dover Fiasco.  I have used WayBack archive to go back to the Discovery Institute web pages from 2005 and have been able to download a copy of
the booklet using those old links.

http://arn.org/docs/dewolf/guidebook.htm

https://web.archive.org/web/20040921022045/http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=58

This is the Wayback link archived in 2005 that I was able to download a
copy of "Teaching the Controversy: Darwinism, Design and the Public
School Science Curriculum. I gave the ARN link above. You can click to download a copy, but you had to pay $7 for a hard copy. Back in 2005
you could click on the link and get a copy. They really do claim that
ID can be taught in the public schools and IDiots can use textbooks such
as "Of Pandas and People" to do it. This web page can still be accessed
from a 2005 archive of the Discovery Institute's ID scam units web
pages. Before the bait and switch started to go down ID was part of the controversy that the ID perps wanted to teach. Once they decided to not
give the rubes any ID science to teach, the "controversy" that they
wanted taught did not have anything to do with ID/creationism by their
own claims.

If you "click here" on the page you get access to a pdf of the booklet
that the Thomas More lawyer had. The pdf seems to be a Discovery
Institute link from 2004 that must have also been archived. The ID
perps had not retracted anything from this initial teach ID scam
propaganda (I do not think that the ID perps have ever retracted any of
the claims in this booklet), and were still claiming that "Of Pandas and People" could be used to teach the IDiocy in the public schools at the
time bait and switch failed in Dover. The Dover rubes had followed
their recommendations and had purchased "Of Pandas and People" to teach
the junk in their schools.

Dover has been the only total failure of the Bait and Switch scam that
the ID perps have been running for over 2 decades. As far as I know
only 4 groups of creationist rubes ever implemented the switch scam and
the vast majority dropped the issue instead of bending over for the
switch scam, so the bait and switch scam has had a pretty miserable
success rate, but the ID perps never stopped using ID as the bait, and
they have never delivered the ID science to any creationists rubes that
have taken the bait.

Ron Okimoto

It is a reflection on the ethics of the Thomas More lawyer that he would consider the ID perp's bait and switch scam as a legitimate strategy. He obviously knew what the ID perps were doing by selling the rubes
intelligent design science, and then only giving them something that
they never wanted, but he maintained his support for teaching
creationism in the public schools, and was willing to defend the ID scam
in Federal court.  The bait and switch had gone down in every single instance that IDiotic creationist rubes had wanted to teach the junk.
Dover was the first and only total failure of the bait and switch
strategy. Only a few IDiotic creationist rubes have bent over for the
switch scam.  The vast majority that have had the bait and switch run on them have dropped the issue.  The ID perps have been the major force
keeping creationism out of the public schools for over 2 decades.  The IDiotic type creationists do not listen to the science side, but they
will listen to the scam artists who sold them the scam. It took a highly incompetent and morally bankrupt group of creationist rubes to not heed
what the ID perps told them, and tried to teach the junk anyway in Dover.

Everyone should recall that when the Dover fiasco started the ID perps
tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover creationist rubes.  The Kitzmiller vs Dover Wiki has the account of how the Discovery Institute
tried to dissuade the Dover rubes from teaching intelligent design, and instead offered them switch scam material (Wells' "Icons of Evolution"
is considered by the ID perps to represent the switch scam type of
denial, and it was used by the Ohio rubes to create their switch scam
lesson plan.  It should be noted that even though the book "Icons of Evolution" had been used to create the lesson plan the citation was
deleted from the draft copy of the Ohio lesson plan in order to expunge
all reference to ID perps in the final copy.).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District

The bait and switch also went down on ex Senator Santorum for the second time.  Santorum had allowed Phillip Johnson to draft the "amendment" to
the No child left behind bill.  The written support for teaching
intelligent design in the public schools eventually found it's way into
the appendix of the bill, and was hailed by the ID perps as a
significant achievement.  Santorum supported the Ohio IDiots in their efforts to teach intelligent design in 2002, and the ID perps ran the
bait and switch on Santorum along with the other IDiotic creationist rubes.

When the Dover fiasco broke into national news Santorum initially
supported the effort in his home state, but then the Discovery Institute began running the bait and switch.  During Santorum's reelection
campaign Santorum flip-flopped on the issue and began claiming that he
did not support teaching intelligent design in Dover.  The other
Republican candidates in the primaries took advantage of this and
questioned Santorum's religious convictions.  Yes, as stupid as it may
be the other Republican candidates also knew that intelligent design was supporting Biblical creationism.  Santorum lost his bid to be reelected
to the Senate, and when he ran for President he was no longer an IDiot,
and claimed that he supported plain old Biblical creationism.

There is no doubt that the ID scam unit at the Discovery Institute has
been selling the rubes the lie that the ID science could be taught in
the public schools.  It was part of the Wedge strategy that Phillip
Johnson is supposed to have developed for the ID scam, and the ID perps doubled down on the stupidity when they put out their teach ID scam propaganda after their Dover loss in Federal court, and they keep
updating that junk about every 3 years.

This is still up at the ID perp's web site.  It had been updated in
2021, but it looks like they subsequently reformated the site and seem
to have reverted to the 2018 version.  It doesn't matter because the
basic teach ID scam nonsense had not changed.

https://www.discovery.org/f/1453/

It is just a fact that the ID perps have been worse than perps and
IDiots only wish that they had the excuse of being idiots.  If anyone
has any alternative reality that they want to put up, my guess is that
all of what I have claimed can still be documented, and the historical reality should be established since ID seems to have died on TO, and a
lot of the TO regulars seem to not understand what happened.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)