Ed Brayton posted Entry 1636 on November 2, 2005 01:59 PM.
Trackback URL: http://www.pandasthumb.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.fcgi/1631
A couple days ago, you may recall, William Dembski made the ridiculous claim that the reason Jeff Shallit had not been called to testify at the Dover trial was because “his obsessiveness against me and ID made him a liability to the ACLU” and because “his deposition was an embarrassment to him and the ACLU and that this was the actual reason for him being withdrawn as a witness at the trial.” I pointed out at the time that Dembski was flat wrong, that in fact it was the defense that tried to keep Shallit off the witness stand, not our side. Today I have posted what should be the final nail in the coffin of Dembski’s silly charge - the motion from the TMLC seeking to exclude Shallit’s testimony and keep him off the witness stand, and the judge’s ruling on that issue noting that the two sides had come to an agreement that Shallit would testify only as a rebuttal witness if necessary but would not be a part of the plaintiff’s primary case. The only question that remains, now that Dembski’s charge has been conclusively disproven, is whether the odds of him admitting that he was wrong are above or below his “universal probability boundary” of 1 in 10^150.
Commenters are responsible for the content of comments. The opinions expressed in articles, linked materials, and comments are not necessarily those of PandasThumb.org. See our full disclaimer.