Changes

::Sure, Ed.  Although many prominent pro-evolution figures in the evolution creation debate believe ID is a new form of creationism, the only source I could easily find was Barbara Forrest’s expert report used in the Kitzmiller v Dover trial.  I couldn’t find a copy online, but here is a part of the first paragraph.

::Sure, Ed.  Although many prominent pro-evolution figures in the evolution creation debate believe ID is a new form of creationism, the only source I could easily find was Barbara Forrest’s expert report used in the Kitzmiller v Dover trial.  I couldn’t find a copy online, but here is a part of the first paragraph.

::"ID's rejection of naturalism in any form logically entails its appeal to the only

::"ID's rejection of naturalism in any form logically entails its appeal to the only alternative, supernaturalism, as a putatively scientific explanation for the natural phenomena.  This makes ID a religious belief.  In addition, my research reveals that ID is not science, but the newest variant of traditional American creationism.  With only a few exceptions, it continues the usual complaints of creationists against the theory of evolution and comprises virtually all the elements of traditional creationism."

alternative, supernaturalism, as a putatively scientific explanation for the natural

phenomena.  This makes ID a religious belief.  In addition, my research reveals that ID

is not science, but the newest variant of traditional American creationism.  With only

a few exceptions, it continues the usual complaints of creationists against the theory

of evolution and comprises virtually all the elements of traditional creationism."

::[[User:Land Dweller|Land Dweller]] 18:09, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

::[[User:Land Dweller|Land Dweller]] 18:09, 28 March 2007 (EDT)