Thanks for a thoughtful reply. I have become somewhat of an expert on this subject in the last few days and it was a very painful process.
If you read my post and actually review the transcript of Kitzmiller, you will see the ID of the ancients as a very different critter than the current ID Movement. I have no problem with ancient cosmologies involving titans, gods, or great serpents creating the universe, or gos creating man. These are religious concepts however, not science. My problem is the dishonest attempt to disguise creationism as science by hiding behind ID and calling it science. At the same time, they take a heavilly supported and accepted theory like evolution and claim it as religion. I am defending scientific method, not just evolution. The barbarians are at the gates.
I agree that the scientific method needs to be upheld and that ID needs to be held to that standard. I think ID’s biggest problem is its inability to identify a creator or designer, probably ever. Another problem is that if they could some how qualify scientifically that design is a possibility without proof of a creator they would more than likely still have to deal with evolution.
No one questions the scientific method. But they do question scientists who claim that a supernatural agent took no part in creation. Or that there is nothing outside the "natural".
You nailed it with that comment. I remember from my childhood when science was separate from politics and religion. Yes, the barbarians were around then as well, but they didn't have the political power they have today. Reasonable people accepted science as agnostic, in other words...just the facts, with no consideration of political or religious correctness.
Today reasonable people are assaulted from both sides. We have the liberal luddites who (think they) want a world where mankind doesn't impact his environment at all, and on the other side we have the religious luddites who refuse to accept any scientific theory that doesn't agree with the bible.
I am not a luddite. I want a world where scientific facts are used to make reasoned decisions. I want a world where scientific advancements lead to improvements in the quality of life. I want to be able to grow new organs to replace my worn out clunkers. I want unbiased climate data to lead to reasoned decisions on whether or not we really need to (or even can) do something about climate change.
The founding fathers were afraid of religious influence on politics, with good reason. I am appalled that this is, once again, a real threat to our way of life. I include both forms of luddites in this opinion because the left wing luddites are just as religiously fanatic as the right wing variety.
Hear hear.