Dear Editor:

Mary Ellen Synon's article (God vs Darwin row evolves, 2/10/05) was
misleading in several respects. For example, in her list of
"scientists" who support intelligent design, Synon includes William
Dembski. I was deposed in the Dover, Pennsylvania, intelligent design
case, and one part of my submission was entitled 'Dembski is not a
scientist' (for the full submission, see www.aclu.org/evolution/profiles.html).

Dembski has no advanced scientific degrees, conducts no experiments,
makes no predictions and has not published any experimental test of his
claims.

His mathematical work is riddled with errors, many of which I pointed
out in a review that appeared in the journal Bio Systems in 2002, but
somehow escaped Mary Ellen Synon. Dembski has never answered my
criticisms.

Synon's most outrageous claim is that Einstein would have supported the
modern intelligent design movement.

Nothing could be further from the truth.  Einstein was well aware of
the need for empirical confirmation of a theory's claims. To drag him
in to support the religious pseudoscience of intelligent design is
despicable.

Jeffrey Shallit