IDiot in Dover testifies for Affirmative Action in science class

Link in the title takes us to a little gem from Dover. We find a witness who claims that ID is fringe science, claims that ID doesn't have any testable theories, and claims students must essentially be recruited in school to the ID way of thought in order for any ID-based research to proceed in the future.

Here's the priceless bit: this loon is a witness called by the ID side. And he actually did use the term "Affirmative Action". Almost makes me sound prescient.

Click below for more...
In a shining example of special pleading, he states:

Why should ID supporters allow the Darwinian establishment to indoctrinate students at the high school level, only to divert some of the brightest to becoming supporters of a mechanistic account of evolution, when by presenting ID at the high school level some of these same students would go on to careers trying to develop ID as a positive research program? If ID is going to succeed as a research program, it will need workers, and these are best recruited at a young age.

If ID is to succeed as a research program, it needs researchers who haven't already come to a predetermined conclusion about the factual nature of ID. It needs researchers who will get off their butts and do some actual lab work, and prove that ID is worth anything. As it stands right now, they're stuck with "wish-in-one-hand, shit-in-the-other, see-which-fills-up-faster" method of truth determination.

We don't teach evolution to kids so that they end up evolution supporters, we teach it so they know how and why evolution is our best scientific explanation to date. We also teach it in hopes that someday, some bright scientist will make a few leaps of logic, conduct some elegant experiments to prove his or her point, leave evolution in the dust, and vastly broaden our understanding of how the world works.

Much like Charles Darwin, who vastly improved our understanding of life by overturning.... Intelligent Design. Darwin succeeded through years of meticulous categorization and observation, not through public school indoctrination. I don't think that is too much to ask for the next generation of scientists. It certainly beats drilling them with vapid details about 200-year-old discredited conjecture.