Intelligent Design=mutant offspring of creationism

In today's great God-versus-Science debate, both sides maneuver for the middle ground. Though he's otherwise tolerant of nothing, George W. Bush calls for evolution and Intelligent Design to be taught together in the science classes of public schools. Meanwhile, our great gray citadel of secular humanism, the New York Times, finds it comforting to tell us (on the front page on August 23) that there really are good Christian scientists out there who do evolution on weekdays and church on Sunday. So what's the problem?

And as for the raw merits of the debate, consider this easy proof of evolution's explanatory power. Intelligent Design cannot explain Darwinian evolution. Darwin's whole point is that variation and change are random and without higher purpose. We cannot imagine that God designed the disproof of his own existence.

But can evolution explain Intelligent Design? Easily. After all, it was less than a century back—when William Jennings Bryan prosecuted (and Clarence Darrow defended) the Scopes case—that the fundamentalists Bryan represented demanded that only a literal biblical account of creation be taught in public schools. They didn't want evolution taught at all. Bryan won in court, but in the schools Darrow and Darwin ultimately prevailed.

And what is Intelligent Design, now seeking its niche in a culture conditioned by tolerant and pliable minds, which pretends to want a peaceable coexistence with evolution rather than to supplant it? What is it indeed, if not the mutant offspring of creationism, born into the world that evolution made? It's a political adaptation. Q.E.D.
http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2005/12/smith_darwin.html

and christian extremists want to embrace "creationism lite" instead of accept the truth in a misguided notion that Jesus would be mad at them. It's unfortunate that someone dreamed up this "more acceptable" alternative to give them other choices besides accepting proven science and even worse that they want this taught in schools when we should be focusing on teaching children what they need to succeed in a competitive world.

One more thing that's unfortunate: William Jennings Bryan was a great man and it's too bad that the Monkey Trial is what he is remembered for.

The more people "believe" in ID, the dumber they get. I already tell people from Kansas that I'll stick to one-syllable words so I don't confuse them. They don't find that funny for some reason.

"We cannot imagine"

I've been asking that question in pro-ID message boards.

I've gotten ZERO responses.

Not ONE person can name me ONE piece of scientific evidence to support this mythology. NOT ONE.

That tells me everything I need to know about ID.