Stealth Attack On Evolution

In this link was:

quote:

---

But the mainstream scientific community contends that this seemingly innocuous agenda is actually a stealthy way of promoting religion.

---

But even if I believed this to be the case, I would expect the evos to have SOMEWHERE a clear discussion of evolution where it was shown how creationism makes claims OF THEIR SCIENCE THAT IS NOT THE WAY it is scientifically. But all I can in truth find is various positions philosophical.It certainly IS NOT the case that it is a back door"" in the sense that NPR wondered if RELIGION somehow affected Bush Admin decisions.
Now IT COULD be a philosophical door as I DO suspect ID to play its legislative way out. BUT THIS IS NOT ICR's view. I can document this but it would take less effort to ask them than me to figure out what they wrote. But EVEN this door seems but glass.Eldrede's book I reviewed DOES CONTAIN what I would expect if one had thought that "equal time" is but this hindge. I knew from the street in Lousiana that it was not but one state does not a Union make. But when it comes to his analysis of DOMINION it is clear that the philosophy any such could have been will but be the rear veiw mirror instead.So unless there REALLY is something, the likes of what I expect Dawkins wanted GOUld to have lived on for for a while longer, yeah there is a POLITICAL question of moderatation movement but it IS NOT what is behind c/e. I hold that there are significant DETERMINABLE errors in the probablistic philosophy of standard evo theory but it is not what a legislative position of Johnsons types is going to find but it will be from the science itself. I think it IS in the biochemistry not the information. But that is my certifiable position only.
EvC Forum: A place for 'I was wrong' admissions/confessions
That position is that what is philosophical and empirical (psychologically) need not be APRIORI and THAT seems to be all the air in the use of the word "stealth" = none!!!!!!!!!