If people were able to separate religion from this debate ID would be an accepted theory.
Well, now that's the trick isn't it?
But unfortunately the leading proponent of ID, the Discovery Institute, is firmly associated with pushing a religious viewpoint rather than conducting scientific investigation.
Their
Wedge Strategy, a fundraising and planning document which somehow leaked out and was posted on the internet, gave the whole sordid scheme away. Some excerpts:
quote:
We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions. ...
Governing Goals
This is why ID is firmly associated with religion.
Oh, and there is always "
cdesign proponentsists" -- in which a creationist textbook was converted into a "design proponents" textbook by just doing some cut and pastes. Except that they accidentally left "cdesign proponentsists" in the text, the perfect missing link between "creationists" and "design proponents" -- whoops!
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
™ Version 4.2
