Correct!!!! Few realize or know the different methods.
I don't know about it only working while preaching to the chior. If someone is open minded, I think they they may be able to see the point being made.
Seeing the point isn't the problem--being pursuaded that the point is worth pursuing by science is.
Can you recommend any other good philosophy sites? I find this stuff interesting.
Actually, I wouldn't hang around on the web very much, I'd hang around at a library, or pick up one of those multi-volume references, and decide who to pursue after digging into that for a while. Copleston, I would guess, would probably still be my recommendation, but if you aren't that ambitious, I thought Durant's "The Story of Philosophy" and Russell's "A History of Western Philosophy" were both sound and entertaining. But I have to warn you, that Copleston is more sympathetic to your case than either of those previous two authors. There are other ways to go, but you did ask me what I recommended.
One of the conflicts that arise in these threads is that some are trying to debate science with philosophy, and they don't realize it. Then they wonder why they can't make a valid argument. For example, ID is a philosophy. If someone wishes to debate it's validity, or not, science is the wrong arena.
Yea, well, I dunno. I don't know much science that didn't live next door to some sort of philosophy, at one time or another, and I don't regard ID as categorically not-a-science, it's just not a science to be taken terribly seriously at the moment, based on the merits of the evidence. Kinda like crop circles, cold-fusion or the healing power of crystal pyramids, any one of which might conceivably stumble onto slam-dunk evidence that will put it firmly onto the science table.