ID as Science vs. ID as Creationism

I've read your post four time sand the title you gave it says it all really - problematic. I really have no idea what you're trying to say, other than scientists don't like religion. To nail that one, can I point out that many scientists are religious, it just so happens that they can tell the difference between religion and science and don't want to teach religion as science.If you want to argue that ID doesn't have religious overtones, I suggest you have a wee read at the Kitzmiller-v-Dover case and look at what those in favour of teaching ID had to say about it, then come back and tell us that religion has nothing to do with ID as it is currently being touted. If religion has nothing to do with it, why would someone say, in trying to get ID into the science classroom or words to that effect (I'm typing from memory, but can find the reference if you so wish)Can I also say that keeping ID out of the science class isn't saying it isn't valid, just as keeping cookery out of the science class isn't saying it isn't valid, or sewing, or baseball, or painting. It's just saying they aren't science!Can you rewrite your post so that I can see if what I think you're saying is actually what you are saying? Pay particular attention to your first paragraph as that really flummoxed me.

Can someone else trasnslate the first paragraph for me because tesla's explanation is even more cryptic that the original paragraph.