[LiteKeeper]

Nice try, but wrong. Your #1 is backwards; #2 doesn't come close; #3 is really on the edge, but not a major factor. Sorry, you obviously are more interested in satire than truth.

[VadeRetro]

Your #1 is backwards.

Needs a bit of analysis, there. How so? That one I refrained from satire, totally.

#2 doesn't come close.

Unsupported assertion. It's Dembski on truth serum.

#3 is really on the edge, but not a major factor.

No, that one's not a biggie. But that's about all the quivvers in the ID arrow.

OK, if you include Johnson and Wells, they drag in a bunch of recycled creationist stuff, trying hard to throw out all the YEC material but occasionally forgetting. One or the other (Johnson?) attacks radiometric dating, for instance. Why do that if you accept the age of the Earth?

The expanded version could thus include:

1. There are no transitional fossils (recycled YECism)
2. The Second Law of Thermo forbids evolution (recycled YECism)
3. Textbooks still show pictures of Haeckel's discredited drawings (you got it by now, right?)
4. Evolution cannot explain the Cambrian Explosion (yada yada)

In the earlier post, I was listing all of the ID writers's original contributions to western civilization. Except that ID was first noticed by Muller, CSI was first noticed by Paley, etc.

I notice you didn't answer my counter-challenge. A chance to demonstrate your acumen, and you delined?