Sorry I missed the other one:
I find it necessary to designate ID creo from creo. Everyone from Percy and Jar to YECs have referred to themselves as creationists in that they believe in a supreme god who somehow have been involved in the process of creation. At least that's how I have understood them. That term creationist is just too broad a term to designate one's ideology, imo.
I see that I misunderstood your use of ID Creo -- You mean a creationist IDer. Not ID / Creo including the two together.
You are right that you can define creationist very broadly (as Jar does) but that only muddies the waters. The term has a commonly understood usage.
No that's just not correct. Jehovah is an intelligent designer who intelligently designed everyting in the universe as per my hypothesis and as well as per all YECs. How can you say intelligent design had anything to do with the early stages of NS and RM?
At least some of the IDers (and it appears their official) position do not disagree with the age of the earth (or at least keep very quiet about it). That means they are NOT in agreement with YECs. They also do NOT claim that all of evolution is untrue -- just selected "IC" bits. I have not seen them say that the evolution of humans is incorrect either. They do not agree with YECs.
You can not be both an IDer and a YEC. You can also not be an IDer and the more common types of OEC. At least as far as the public front of ID is concerned. It has been contrived that way as a trick to get past the constitution of course. Many of the ID community agree with you and YEC and most OECers but that is not the "official" position that they can put forward. So ID (as a 'movement') has to be in conflict with YEC and much of OEC too or it fails in what it is trying to do.
™ Version 4.2
