[goody2shooz]

"There's probably a place for [discussing] higher intelligence," he said. "But that's probably a history of religion class as opposed to a science curriculum, which is based on fact."

Is this person saying that higher intelligence is not a fact? It sure reads that way to me!

[=Intervention=]

One more thing. Isn't it quite unscientific to be absolutely certain of your argument, when all of science is based upon the data available to you? Therefore, any new data that arrives has the potential of breaking your paradigm. ID folks advance hypothesees that point to flaws in Darwin's theories...recall again that all that is required to disprove a theory is contradicting evidence, which exists in abundance for evolution. Yet, the old guard scients hold on, rigid in their evolutionary dogma, reminding me so much like the church of Galileo's time...again, I find the reversal of roles ironic and deeply humorous.