Sorry, but even the scientifically competent among the ID crowd agree that evolution is a historic fact. Michael Denton, author of "Evolution, a Theory in Crisis, has written a new book, "Nature's Destiny," on intelligent Design. In it he says this:
"it is important to emphasize at the outset that the argument presented here is entirely consistent with the basic naturalistic assumption of modern science - that the cosmos is a seamless unity which can be comprehended ultimately in its entirety by human reason and in which all phenomena, including life and evolution and the origin of man, are ultimately explicable in terms of natural processes.This is an assumption which is entirely opposed to that of the so-called "special creationist school". According to special creationism, living organisms are not natural forms, whose origin and design were built into the laws of nature from the beginning, but rather contingent forms analogous in essence to human artifacts, the result of a series of supernatural acts, involving the suspension of natural law.
Contrary to the creationist position, the whole argument presented here is critically dependent on the presumption of the unbroken continuity of the organic world - that is, on the reality of organic evolution and on the presumption that all living organisms on earth are natural forms in the profoundest sense of the word, no less natural than salt crystals, atoms, waterfalls, or galaxies."
Behe, the chief defense witness at Dover, has this to say about evolution:
I didn't intend to "dismiss" the fossil record--how could I "dismiss" it? In fact I mention it mostly to say that it can't tell us whether or not biochemical systems evolved by a Darwinian mechanism. My book concentrates entirely on Darwin's mechanism, and simply takes for granted common descent.
Little "e" evolution is a scientific fact, per the definition of a scientific fact (as opposed to the vulgar). It is observable and repeatable, and subject to revision or discard as the tools of observation improve. The "Theory of Evolution" is a scientific theory, in which the scientific fact of evolution plays a central mechanistic role.
I usually must assume that the Creationists/IDers on these threads are conflating evolution withthe Theory of Evolution when they address these themselves to the topic, because I have yet to find one who deos not accept what they call "microevolution" -- therefore, when they profess skepticism regarding "evolution", I presume they are in fact referring to the Theory of Evolution, and frame my response within that context.
No deal. Evolution is a fact. The Theory of Evolution is a theory.
Works for me. In fact, my theory is that we know precious little regarding the origins of life, and human life in particular.