I found the following argument while looking at the technorati tag for intelligent+design after posting this excerpt. Another excellent argument! If this keeps up, I’m going to have to think of a better word than “excellent.”
Political Zen: Not so intelligent, by design
Despite the fact that the overwhelming majority in the scientific community reject ID and its component concept of irreducible complexity (see Michael Behe), it has become a fiery issue in recent years and now is being tested in the courts. Proponents of ID are primarily seeking its inclusion in the science curriculum at the secondary education level, arguing its merits as a scientific theory rather than religious belief. Great care has been taken to avoid language that would place ID in the more accurate category of Creationism.It is my opinion that ID is nothing more than dressed up teleological argument and a blatant attempt to inject God into the classroom. When confronted, advocates for ID claim that it is a scientific theory offered as a reasonable alternative to evolution. Unfortunately, ID does not have any supporting empirical data and therefore can not be treated as a viable scientific theory.
white pebble 