[Rurudyne]

"Outright fantasy" ... like the version of evolution we teach in k12 as if it were the real state of the theory? I've always wondered what was accomplished (or who benefits) by teaching a quaint myth of evolution in the form of ideas sometimes so obsolete that they are laughable.

I suppose it is cheaper to print bad textbooks rather than good.(Now, where's that wink gif?)

As for philosophy ... too pretentious for me, I'll stay a Standup Philosopher.

[RightWhale]

Evolution is a method. Teachers and journalists refer to it as a theory, which is perhaps as Darwin and his contemporaries thought of it. As such, evolution is the province of philosophy moreso than of science. As for science, evolution makes things very difficult if the intent is to figure everything out about the world we can see. ID would make true science as we commonly envision it possible. It's a paradox unless we think of science as engineering.