AIG is a creationist site, not an ID site. If you look at major ID sites like Dembski's or telicthoughts you will find the majority of posters accept common descent and a multi-billion year old earth.
Here's a good discussion of common descent that discusses Behe's position, among others.
Ack! Coherency is a fleeting thing; it a spinning thing, and it's falling deeper out of view..! I'm already working too hard to see the veracity in your statements. Like my grandpa could have but probably didn't say, if I man can't make his own point he probably doesn't have one!
The "good discussion" about Behe's position contained two short quotes of him, probably, one of which was a partial sentence, so I don't even know if they are in context.
As to AIG, I guess I figured that creation says that God is intelligent and he designed all life, and therefore AIG was a proponent of ID but I guess by "ID" you mean something like "those people who promote ID but who do not promote the idea of a God." I should have asked what ID meant to you. All cars may have wheels but not all things with wheels are cars. I figured all creationists were IDers but not all IDer's were Bible-believing creationists.
As to Dembski's or telicthoughts, you still didn't demonstrate that your statement was true. That's why I asked who you considered major proponents of ID. Without going and reading tons of forum posts (I'm not familiar with either website) I have no idea what you're talking about. You say that the majority of posters accept common descent and old earth - but what posters are you talking about? One's who agree with Dembski? or just any joe blow evolutionist poster who comes by and leaves a post - like happen on FR? If you'll notice, a very high percentage of the posts on a pro-ID article on FR are by ID apposers, which doesn't prove a thing about the intent of the article in question.
But don't worry, I'm now reasonably certain that my earlier suspicion of lack of coherency and validity was accurate. You see, as I move along in any direction whether it be driving someplace to following the logic of a conversation, when things start to not make sense, I like to stop and see if something's wrong. In our conversation, I detected that something wasn't quite right, and sure enough upon further investigation, I found that you're making rather bold statements that you are unwilling to demonstrate as accurate.
And maybe you're not a scientists, but when a scientists makes a statement as fact, I expect them to be able to show just how they came to that conclusion - without leaving the hearer guessing and searching and trying to figure out what the speaker means.
In other words, if you said that "No major ID proponent denies common descent" then when I reply with something like "Who do you consider major ID proponents? can you provide links?" I would have expected a reply along the lines of "Oh sure! I consider "X,Y,Z" to be the major proponents of ID, and here, and here, and here (links) you can see for yourself that none of them deny common descent.."
But instead I just keep getting vague references, half quotes, and I find that I'm working way harder to try and demonstrate your point then you are - and I still haven't demonstrated it.
By the way, I've already had LeGrande tell me that the apparent position of the sun is lagged 2.1 degrees behind its actual position, and by the same math Pluto wouldn't even be in the night sky when we looked up and saw it when it was far enough away that he earth rotated 102 degrees in the time of flight of light. I've had Soliton telling me that little lies are okay, and even required in order to keep society running. My attitude of desiring coherency and provability for the things I hear is not unreasonable.
What's your take on lying? Always ok? never ok? little lies are ok? What's the defining factor between an ok and not-ok lie? is the difference that you can ultimately get away with one but not the other?
It helps to know this when discussing things with people. I say lying is never ok just like murder is never ok.
Thanks,
-Jesse