As it happens, however, anyone familiar with the literature of “Scientific Creationism” will recognize that the arguments of ID's are different only in style, not in substance, from those of the YEC's. Furthermore, ID hit the scene shortly after YEC suffered several court defeats during the eighties. And considering the copious writings from the Discovery Institute and leading ID proponents about wanting to destroy naturalism and restore their version of a Christian worldview to intellectual respectability, it is not at all unfair to describe ID as a form of creationism.Also, let's not forget that the original version of the Intelligent Design 'textbook' Of Pandas and People originally used the word creationism. This was later replaced with 'intelligent design' after creationism was smacked around in the US courts in order to get around this little problem. Really, despite what the Discovery Institute and the likes of the author of the American Thinkers article would have you believe, the current ID movement is nothing more than redressed up creationism. Simply because there were previous notions of 'design' in nature doesn't change the origin or general character of the current ID movement.
Saturday, August 27, 2005
American Thinker Article Dismantled
Over at Evolutionblog, Jason takes the time to dismantle this piece from the American thinker.