You don't mention a single think about their actual research or accomplishments, you just say, "They're not credible because they're associated with ID." How can you possibly give ID a fair shot if you're going to use this kind of reasoning?
Hi commike,
I didn't attend the conference. If you attended it, please could you give a quick overview of their substantive research accomplishments? If you didn't attend, is there a website or a book or something where their research results were presented?
Thanks,
Mick