It was only in that very generic sense that the book used the notion of "creation"that is, that signs of plan, purpose, and intelligence in nature point to an intelligent cause, added Luskin. Pandas makes it explicitly clear in many instances that they are not postulating a supernatural cause, because to do so would go beyond the limits of science. No word-processor-conspiracy-theory from Forrest can change the fact that Pandas arguments were always distinct from those of traditional creationism.
Once that term had been so defined, its understandable and perfectly appropriate that people trying to use the term in a completely different way (reasoning from scientific evidence to design) would be all the more interested in finding a term that more precisely fit what they were actually doing. Without changing the substance of their argument (from evidence in nature to intelligence, and not speculating about the supernatural), the authors found a more generic term that was less likely to be misunderstood.
`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'
`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master -- that's all.'