Replies

From the article: Some want to protect Darwinism from the competitive marketplace by overturning the critical-analysis standards. My hope is that these efforts will merely lead students to ask, What's the evidence they don't want us to see?

I think I'll take a crack at it.

From the prospective of those who support evolution, ID is an end run around the supposed constitutional separation between church and state; and I think it is also. To pretend otherwise only lends suspicion to those who are suspicious. I disagree with that interpretation of the constitution, but that is another discussion. Evos also have a great deal of data that supports their position. This debate is not going to be won with the endless shallow peppered moth finch beak macro/micro discussions when the battle is way down in the trenches of cell structure and mechanics. Based on these things evos have concluded that some IDers are intellectually lazy and dishonest, and frankly, I tend to agree.

Onward to Kansas... From the evo perspective they believe they are being challenged for the minds of America's youth in their area of expertise by a group of zealots who are trying to subvert the system. Is there anyone here on FR who has watched liberals operate that does not understand "successive approximations to an ultimate goal"?

Connect the dots folks. If we Christians have faith is so weak that we cannot enter into honest debate about this issue then the problem doesn't rest with evolution. Is that to say that these "lovely" qualities are not present on both sides? Not at all; we have all read the exchanges here. But if truth does not win the day then we are no better than Pilot, willing to do and believe whatever is convenient for us. That must never be.