The prof's a political hack saying what he said for partisan purposes.
ID is not creationism.
It doesn't even say that the Intelligent Designer has to be sentient.....it could be an organizing principle.
Then what did the "Intelligent Designer" do, if not create a design?
ID is creationism.
Besides the logic, you can tell it's the same thing because of the people surrounding the movement. The same people who promote Genesis creationism promote ID.
I was unaware that "principles" had the ability to intelligently design anything.
ID works very hard to avoid any discussion of the designer, for very obvious reasons. It changes the nature of the discussion from that which has been designed to what did the designing in the first place.
The problem there is, of course, pretty straightforward. If the designer is not of the material world, how does the non-material work on the material? (Which btw, is one of the creationist arguments against evolution - how does something come from nothing - can't have your cake and eat it too, y'know). If the IDer admits that the designer is of the material world, then we can conduct scientific experiments on the designer. Since both sides of the coin lead the IDer to an untenable position, all discussion of the designer must be squelched.