<< Now if you find anything wrong in the analysis of the problems with "ID" and why it is not actually the "science" it claims to be, feel free to point them out. But simply waving your hands about "gosh, maybe bias might have led someone astray somewhere" just doesn't even begin to cut it. >>
My favorite argument -- which I have seen repeatedly in here over the years -- is in two parts. To paraphrase:
1) ID is not about God or the Bible, so why do you "evos" keep pushing that lie about ID?
2) If you want to keep ID out of the science classroom, that just proves that you hate God and the Bible.
I would not be surprised to see a response to THIS message -- which merely highlights what I have seen happen in these debates -- with some variation of one or both of those arguments being used against me.
1) ID is not about God or the Bible, so why do you "evos" keep pushing that lie about ID?
2) If you want to keep ID out of the science classroom, that just proves that you hate God and the Bible.
Well ID is creationsism as described in Genesis. Documents submitted in a court of law as evidence clearly states this connection by the very people who synthesized and propagated the concept of ID. It has been proven in a court of law that ID is creationism with a fuzzy box where God would be mentioned.
And any scientist, not just evolutionary biologists want ID out of the classroom because it corrupts the very core of what science is all about. Moreover, to label such scientists as God hating Bible burners shows how foolish you are. Religious scientists know the difference between the two and are aware of the dangers of mixing them inappropriately. For example, I am a Christian and am an ordained Elder. I do not see a conflict with Christianity and evolution, nor does my faith try to chain God in a book rather than acknowledge how vastly mysterious He is. Creationism is a primitivization of Christianity and transforms a grand religion into book idolatry.