The state of ID/YECism here at EvC

Could you enumerate the versions for us?--Percy

PE is a generally accepted concept within evolution. What you may be thinking of is that PE is often denigrated as a novel concept, many feeling that it was introduced way back in the 20's (by R. A. Fischer perhaps, or maybe Sewall Wright, or maybe someone else, I honestly can't recall at the moment). Gould and Eldredge's contribution, which many within evolutionary circles feel is minor, is to link the concept of PE to the fossil distribution in the geologic column.--Percy

My own opinion is that it is the change in emphasis from YECism to IDism that has caused the decline in participation by Creationists. With YECism there were literally dozens of topics to debate, such as the shrinking sun, the declining magnetic field, the variation in ¹²C concentrations, the unreliability of radioactive dating, the depth of moon dust, the lack of transitionals, white holes, hydrologic sorting, runaway subduction, accelerated evolution within kinds, and so forth. Creationists could visit any number of Creationist websites and get all charged up on any and all of these subjects so that they could then traipse into discussion boards like this one and display their ignorance.ID takes away all this easily comprehended ammunition. Any Creationist who decides that ID, while not ideal from a YEC perspective, is the best bet against evolution has to give up all those arguments. Those Creationists who expend the effort to familiarize themselves with the details of ID understand that they have to give up a young earth and concede that most of evolution occurred naturally. I think many do so very reluctantly, and so they cannot muster sufficient enthusiasm for it to participate in discussions about it at online discussion boards.I expect there will at some point be a backlash by traditional Creationists against ID, especially as they realize that ID has no better chance of overturning evolution than YECism.Those Creationists who are enthusiastic about ID, like Randman and Buzsaw, don't understand it. Mostly such people are YEC's who somehow don't perceive the contradictions between YECism and IDism.--Percy

The quality of our contributions here is not for ourselves to judge. It's not really necessary for you to engage in continuous self-puffery and the denigration of others, and the latter is contrary to the Forum Guidelines.If you really feel your YEC beliefs are consistent with ID then feel free to propose a thread to discuss it.--Percy

It's been around longer than you realize, too. I first read about ID in the 1960's when I read an account of Paley's famous watch analogy, composed back in 1802. The recent trial in Dover traced ID's origins back even further, to Saint Augustine, I believe.--Percy

If you'd like to give a clear statement of what you believe, then go ahead. So far you've been closed and secretive. All I have to go on so far is your claim that the real world is consistent with the Biblical accounts of creation. This is a YEC position, so if you don't want people to assume you're a YEC then it is encumbent upon you to be more forthcoming about your views.--Percy

Adminnemooseus is correct that we're drifting off-topic, so I'll just say that what you say appears contradictory to me, and certainly in contradiction to what the bright lights of ID believe, so if you're interested in resolving these apparent contradictions please start a new thread. Yes, we know, everyone here is always slandering you for no good reason. You could only hold mistaking you for a YEC to be slander if you considered the YEC position to be a seriously flawed view. But this contradicts what you said just above, that the Biblical account is consistent with the YEC view, and therefore perfectly respectable. If you don't want to be clear about your views then that's your choice, but in that case don't blame others for thinking the contradictions in your viewpoint stem from confusion.Oh, and regarding slander, who was it that typed the subtitle for this subtread? By the way, buffoon has two o's.--Percy