Does anyone believe that?
There are numerous differences between Creationism and Intelligent Design. Creationism is basically a religious approach, although understandably its proponents tried to disguise it as science after the Supreme Court declared that religion would not be allowed in the public schools. It's basically a response to a distorted interpretation of the Constitution that tries to get religion in the back door. It would be better if we could appoint some decent judges and allow open and fair discussion of religion in the schools via the front door.
Intelligent Design, on the other hand, actually is a scientific approach, like it or not. It does not begin with Genesis, but begins with the nature of the universe as we find it. It does not claim to know whether the intelligence that designed the universe is the God of the Bible or something else, although people are welcome to draw their own conclusions.
The problem is, this joker will still pretend that they are the same, and that they are myths, and that the ONLY scientific theory possible is Darwinist. No other theories may be allowed to lift their heads in the public schools, now and forever more.
How do you reconcile these statements with the famous Wedge Document: here?
A sample paragraph:
The social consequences of materialism have been devastating. As symptoms, those consequences are certainly worth treating. However, we are convinced that in order to defeat materialism, we must cut it off at its source. That source is scientific materialism. This is precisely our strategy. If we view the predominant materialistic science as a giant tree, our strategy is intended to function as a "wedge" that, while relatively small, can split the trunk when applied at its weakest points. The very beginning of this strategy, the "thin edge of the wedge," was Phillip ]ohnson's critique of Darwinism begun in 1991 in Darwinism on Trial, and continued in Reason in the Balance and Defeatng Darwinism by Opening Minds. Michael Behe's highly successful Darwin's Black Box followed Johnson's work. 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.
I wholeheartedly agree.
Intelligent Design, on the other hand, actually is a scientific approach, like it or not.
I don't like it, I don't have to like it, and the "or not" ultimatum is an empty defense. ID is nothing more than Creationism all dressed up in a science dress that doesn't fit and that...
".... tries to get religion in the back door."
The problem with you ID'rs is that you are duplicitous.
No one else is fooled so, don't fool yourself! ID is a completely bogus charlatan joke on the terminally ignorant.