In an ironic twist, some critics of Intelligent Design point out that the Kitzmiller case itself is an excellent example of “evolution in action,” specifically with respect to how the language and rhetorics used by creationists have adapted to a changing cultural and legal climate. While the defense tried to show that Intelligent Design is an “entirely new species” unrelated altogether to creation science, the plaintiffs swiftly demonstrated the clear connection between the two, and how the court system itself had prompted these changes. According to Intelligent Design advocate mathematician William Dembski, “Intelligent design is just the Logos theology of John’s Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory.” Critics point out that eighty-one years after John T. Scopes was brought to trial in Scopes v the State of Tennessee, creationism has not yet “mutated enough to survive”.