The predecessor textbook to
Of Pandas and People freely used the word "creationist" to discribe the adherents of the belief. When creationism was ruled a religious belief rather then a science to be taught along with evolution the publishers, rather then scrapping the book, edited it by replacing "creationist" with "design proponents".
During the Dover trial, mentioned by Huntard, the ID'ists claimed that they were driven to this belief by the scientific evidence alone as explained in the ID'ist text
Of Pandas and People, and that they had nothing to do with the earlier religious belief: creationism. Therefore, ID should be taught along with the ToE in science classes.
Someone going through the book, however, found a transcription error ” itself ironic” where "creationist" had not been completely swiped and the insertion of "design proponent" only replace the "reation" leaving "cdesign proponetist" proving that ID was a direct, evolutionary descendent of Creationism; therefore, having no place in a science classroom.
AbE: I agree with the objection to "Troll", BTW.
Edited by lyx2no, : e
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.
- Thomas Jefferson
™ Version 4.2
