[Ichneumon]

Hows many PhD's do you have? These are scientists from notable universities around the world.

I have enough knowledge to spot the fallacies in Meyer's paper, including the ways in which he has misrepresented a numbef of the scientists he claimed as "support".

The "theory" of evolution may yet go the way of the following other iron clad science of its day

Dream on. For the past 150 years, evolutionary biology has only gotten stronger and stronger, as ever larger mountains of evidence, along growing numbers of lines of independent confirmation, have continued to strengthen the validity of the theory.

More to the point, what are these guys so afraid of.

What they're concerned about (not "afraid of") is the way in which creationist pseudoscience has used organized propaganda campaigns in order to undermine legitimate science, and sow dishonest confusion and doubt among the public and students about large numbers of fields of science. This is the kind of road that the Soviet Union went down when it embraced Lysenkoism, which led enormous human suffering and death.

[dervish]

"For the past 150 years, evolutionary biology has only gotten stronger and stronger"

and

"What they're concerned about (not "afraid of") is the way in which creationist pseudoscience has used organized propaganda campaigns in order to undermine legitimate science, and sow dishonest confusion and doubt among the public and students about large numbers of fields of science. This is the kind of road that the Soviet Union went down when it embraced Lysenkoism, which led enormous human suffering and death"

.....................

You have contradicted yourself -- is evolution theory getting "stronger and stronger" or is it in danger of being undermined by second rate misrepresentors with little science to back them up? You can't have it both ways.

Second, the practical applications of evolution such as genetic modification, evolving resistance, etc. can be accepted by all without ever reaching the concept of a Prime Mover.

It is the religion of secularism that insists on putting its stamp of closed on that one. Further my point is that a closed mind is dangerous from whichever direction it comes.

If Meyer's article was so faulty why wasn't that the subject of the criticism and rebuke?

[carumba]

...in order to undermine legitimate science...This reminds me of Neil Simon's Kodachrome line, "When I look back at all the crap I learned in High School." Science is pragmatic enough that dogma and flap doodle are discarded. Cold fusion is a more recent example. My thought on ID is that I feel sorry for those kids preparing for a final exam on it. Unless they signed up for some philosophy class or a comparative religion class.