War Liberal

What scares me the most about this is that many people seem to believe that ID is simply the idea that evolution was the tool God used to create the world. Evolution is such a beautiful, intricate system--is it so wrong to acknowledge a Creator who set it in motion? they say. James Lileks, who I would expect to be better informed, had a column along those lines. (I sent him an email but got no reply, big surprise.) Possibly this is because sensible, thinking people want to accept evolution without giving up a belief in God, and they're happy to seize on ID as a pleasant compromise.

The other scary thing is the idea that the word "theory" used in science means "well, it's anybody's guess."

That's what has teed me off the most. I think the ID people are just upset because they realize that their idea of a Creator will never even move to the realm of "scientific theory" because it's untestable. I say let them read their damn statement. It can go something like this:

"Although we're about to learn about evolution, the government requires me to tell you that it's only a 'theory,' which means that it is a logical, scientific model consistently supported by observable fact. This is in contrast to a hypothesis, which is the Greek word for "assumption." An example of a hypothesis would be the so-called Intelligent Design. ID assumes something designed all of the planet's species. This is a good example of a hypothesis because it's untestable, defies logic, and is not supported by any observable fact."

Dan -

Your post is half right. The part about the theory of evolution is right.

ID, however, is NOT a hypothesis. It's not EVEN a hypothesis. A hypothesis IS testable. A hypothesis should NOT defy logic.

Also, in general, ID should never be confused with the idea that God exists, and evolution happened. This idea is not a logical fallacy. ID is the claim that evolution does NOT explain life AND that this "proves" that life is "intelligently designed", by a designer who cannot be identified.

Harold, thank you for stating clearly what my post did not: that ID is NOT the belief that God used evolution to create the world. I have run across many people who think that ID is just that, and I have a sneaking suspicion that ID supporters are happy to have the support of these misinformed folks and are somehow keeping the matter a little cloudy on purpose.

Yeah I sacrificed a little to make a point. I've never really delved into the inner workings of the Intelligent Design "idea." I always assumed it was as they apparently want me to assume -- that it's God exists and used evolution. Thanks for letting me know better.

That's what I thought too, Dan, until I read Finding Darwin's God, by Kenneth Miller. It's a wonderful examination of the whole controversy by a scientist who is also a Christian (well, he's a Catholic, so I guess he's not Christian at all by some lights).