[aNYCguy]

So, the Darwinists concede that God could exist, and could have created the universe? But nevertheless that human life must be merely a product of random mutation over millions of years?

Firstly, Darwinists is a strange term and generally not an appreciated term. Mainstream physicists aren't called Newtonians or Einsteinists and computer scientists aren't called Knuthists. :-)

Anyways, yes, an adherent to mainstream biology could believe that a supernatural force created the universe, set the rules of matter-energy interaction into motion, watched as evolution unfolded to produce humans precisely according to divine plan, and since then has taken a personal interest in every human being. There is certainly no shortage of people with this belief.

[furball4paws]

I used to complain about the use of "Darwinism" and its variants. It is not an incorrect word from an English point of view, but "Evolution" is more acceptable.

However, like the Propaganda machine of the USSR, Creos think by using "Darwinism" or "Darwinist" they can demonize a man instead of a science, a more simplistic thing to do. They can't seem to understand that even if Darwin had the traits of a zit combined with PMS, his theory stand or sinks without him. Once promulgated it has become an independent scientific endeavor and that trying to smear the science by smearing its inventor is meaningless.

[metmom]

Anyways, yes, an adherent to mainstream biology could believe that a supernatural force created the universe, set the rules of matter-energy interaction into motion, watched as evolution unfolded to produce humans precisely according to divine plan, and since then has taken a personal interest in every human being. There is certainly no shortage of people with this belief.

Isn't this then what as known as the ID position?