As far as I know, "Zeus" was a personal name given to a very strong "god." "The principal god of the Greek pantheon, ruler of the heavens, and father of other gods and mortal heroes." The name is found in Greek mythology, which clearly presents itself as such, and thus would hardly be considered a scientifically reasonable entity.
"Theos" was the generic name ascribed to the ultimate intelligent designer. This concept is handy for explaining the fact that particle matter and biological entities demonstrate a manner and degree of organization and function far beyond the capacity of intelligent human beings. Intelligent design has been a standard assumption of science from the start. Science cannot detect any data that is wholly unstable and disorganized and thus not manifest to any human sense.
There is no harm in beginning with the assumption that particle matter is intelligently designed in such a way that intelligent deings are able to observe it and comment about it. Nor is there any harm in simply saying "God did it." In fact, it is a very reasonable starting point for science. From there it may explore and describe in whatever way it wishes exactly what God did.
Meanwhile science must leave it an open question as to what may or may not become manifest during its investigation. It may become apparent, after further study of the speed of light, for example, that it has not always been constant. What would such an observation imply for the rest of the scientific world? I happen to believe the speed of light is slowing down.
Science calls the natural force of attraction "gravity." Great. But is it really "natural?" All that means is that it's usual and ordinary, not unlike intelligence and design. But what makes these things "usual and ordnary?" Is it merely the length of time the process happens, or its predictability?
Merry Christmas!
Discovery Institute's Center for Renewal of Science and Culture developed a "Wedge Document" in which it said the goal of the intelligent design movement is to "replace science as currently practiced with 'theistic and Christian science.'"
Jones also points out that the ID textbook the Dover policy encouraged students to check out, "Of Pandas and People," is not only published by an organization identified in IRS filings as a "religious, Christian organization," but that the book was meticulously changed following the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in 1987 that the U.S. Constitution forbids the teaching of creationism as science.
By comparing the early drafts to the later ones, he said, it was clear that the definition for creation science was identical to the definition of intelligent design and that the word creation and its variants were replaced with the phrase ID and that it all happened shortly after the Supreme Court decision.
Elsewhere --
As far as I can tell, there's hardly a liberal in this story. The judge is a Republican. The voters who kicked out their school board come from a staunchly conservative community. It appears that the movement to sneak religion into science class -- which has commanded a national debate -- is the work of a noisy few.