Editing Intelligent design (section)

====''Of Pandas and People''====
{{Main|Of Pandas and People}}
[[File:Pandas text analysis.png|thumb|upright=1.5|Use of the terms "creationism" versus "intelligent design" in sequential drafts of the 1989 book ''Of Pandas and People''<ref name="Matzke" />]]
The most common modern use of the words "intelligent design" as a term intended to describe a field of inquiry began after the United States Supreme Court ruled in June 1987 in the case of ''[[Edwards v. Aguillard]]'' that it is [[Constitutionality#Unconstitutional laws in the United States|unconstitutional]] for a state to require the teaching of creationism in public school science curricula.<ref name="Matzke" />

A Discovery Institute report says that Charles B. Thaxton, editor of ''Pandas'', had picked the phrase up from a [[NASA]] scientist.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.evolutionnews.org/2005/12/post_6001764.html |title=Dover Judge Regurgitates Mythological History of Intelligent Design |last=Witt |first=Jonathan |date=December 20, 2005 |website=Evolution News & Views |publisher=Discovery Institute |location=Seattle |access-date=2012-06-16}}</ref> In two successive 1987 drafts of the book, over one hundred uses of the root word "creation", such as "creationism" and "Creation Science", were changed, almost without exception, to "intelligent design",<ref name=kitz31/> while "creationists" was changed to "design proponents" or, in one instance, "[[cdesign proponentsists]]"{{sic}}.<ref name="Matzke">{{cite journal |last=Matzke |first=Nick |author-link=Nick Matzke |date=January–April 2006 |title=Design on Trial: How NCSE Helped Win the ''Kitzmiller'' Case |url=http://ncse.com/rncse/26/1-2/design-trial |journal=Reports of the National Center for Science Education |volume=26 |issue=1–2 |pages=37–44 |issn=2158-818X |access-date=2009-11-18 |ref=Matzke 2006a}}
* {{cite web |url=http://www2.ncseweb.org/wp/?p=80 |title=Missing Link discovered! |last=Matzke |first=Nick |date=November 7, 2005 |website=Evolution Education and the Law |publisher=National Center for Science Education |location=Berkeley, Calif. |type=Blog |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070114121029/http://www2.ncseweb.org/wp/?p=80 |archive-date=January 14, 2007 |access-date=2009-11-18}}</ref> In June 1988, Thaxton held a conference titled "Sources of Information Content in DNA" in [[Tacoma, Washington|Tacoma]], [[Washington (state)|Washington]].<ref name=picshb>{{cite conference |url=http://www.leaderu.com/offices/thaxton/docs/inpursuit.html |title=In Pursuit of Intelligent Causes: Some Historical Background |last=Thaxton |first=Charles B. |date=June 24–26, 1988 |conference=Sources of Information Content in DNA |location=Tacoma, Wash. |oclc=31054528 |access-date=2007-10-06}} Revised July 30, 1988, and May 6, 1991.</ref> Stephen C. Meyer was at the conference, and later recalled that "The term ''intelligent design'' came up..."<ref name="Safire 05">{{cite news |last=Safire |first=William |author-link=William Safire |date=August 21, 2005 |title=Neo-Creo |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/21/magazine/21ONLANGUAGE.html |newspaper=The New York Times |access-date=2012-06-16}}</ref> In December 1988 Thaxton decided to use the label "intelligent design" for his new creationist movement.<ref name="DarkSyde" />

''Of Pandas and People'' was published in 1989, and in addition to including all the current arguments for ID, was the first book to make systematic use of the terms "intelligent design" and "design proponents" as well as the phrase "design theory", defining the term ''intelligent design'' in a glossary and representing it as not being creationism. It thus represents the start of the modern [[intelligent design movement]].<ref name="Matzke" /><ref name="Matzke 007" /><ref name="pandafounds">{{cite web |url=http://ncse.com/creationism/analysis/critique-pandas-people |title=Critique: 'Of Pandas and People' |last=Matzke |first=Nick |date=November 23, 2004 |website=National Center for Science Education |location=Berkeley, Calif. |type=Blog |access-date=2007-09-24}}</ref> "Intelligent design" was the most prominent of around fifteen new terms it introduced as a new lexicon of creationist terminology to oppose evolution without using religious language.<ref name="Aulie">{{cite web|url=http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/archive/design/aulie_of-pandas.html |title=A Reader's Guide to Of Pandas and People |last=Aulie |first=Richard P. |author-link=Richard P. Aulie |year=1998 |publisher=[[National Association of Biology Teachers]] |location=McLean, Va. |access-date=2007-10-05 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140306082532/http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/archive/design/aulie_of-pandas.html |archive-date=March 6, 2014 }}</ref> It was the first place where the phrase "intelligent design" appeared in its primary present use, as stated both by its publisher Jon A. Buell,<ref name="SM 07">{{cite journal |last1=Scott |first1=Eugenie C. |author-link1=Eugenie Scott |last2=Matzke |first2=Nicholas J. |author-link2=Nick Matzke |date=May 15, 2007 |title=Biological design in science classrooms |journal=[[Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America]] |volume=104 |issue=Suppl 1 |pages=8669–8676 |bibcode=2007PNAS..104.8669S |doi=10.1073/pnas.0701505104 |pmc=1876445 |pmid=17494747 |doi-access=free }} [http://www.pnas.org/content/104/suppl_1/8669.abstract abstract]</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/10/i_guess_id_real.html |title=I guess ID really was 'Creationism's Trojan Horse' after all |last=Matzke |first=Nick |date=October 13, 2005 |website=The Panda's Thumb |publisher=The TalkOrigins Foundation, Inc. |location=Houston |type=Blog |access-date=2009-06-02 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080624124225/http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/10/i_guess_id_real.html |archive-date=June 24, 2008 }}</ref> and by [[William A. Dembski]] in his expert witness report for ''Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District''.<ref name="Dembski Witness Report">{{cite web |last=Dembski |first=William A. |url=http://www.designinference.com/documents/2005.09.Expert_Report_Dembski.pdf |archive-url=https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20050930230119/http://www.designinference.com/documents/2005.09.Expert_Report_Dembski.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-date=September 30, 2005 |title=Expert Witness Report: The Scientific Status of Intelligent Design |date=March 29, 2005 |access-date=2009-06-02 }} Dembski's expert report in ''Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District''.</ref>

The [[National Center for Science Education]] (NCSE) has criticized the book for presenting all of the basic arguments of intelligent design proponents and being actively promoted for use in public schools before any research had been done to support these arguments.<ref name=pandafounds/> Although presented as a scientific textbook, philosopher of science [[Michael Ruse]] considers the contents "worthless and dishonest".<ref>[[#Hughes 1992|Ruse 1992]], p. 41</ref> An [[American Civil Liberties Union]] lawyer described it as a political tool aimed at students who did not "know science or understand the controversy over evolution and creationism". One of the authors of the science framework used by California schools, [[Kevin Padian]], condemned it for its "sub-text", "intolerance for honest science" and "incompetence".<ref name="RethinkingSchools">{{cite magazine |last=Lynn |first=Leon |date=Winter 1997–1998 |title=Creationists Push Pseudo-Science Text |url=http://www.rethinkingschools.org/restrict.asp?path=archive/12_02/panda.shtml |magazine=Rethinking Schools |location=Milwaukee |publisher=Rethinking Schools, Ltd. |volume=12 |issue=2 |issn=0895-6855 |access-date=2009-02-08 |archive-date=2016-08-26 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160826233505/http://www.rethinkingschools.org/restrict.asp?path=archive%2F12_02%2Fpanda.shtml |url-status=dead }}</ref>