But that's separating the idea from the movement. Which I do.

I think this is an important thing to do, because "Intelligent Design" is such a well-designed marketing term that it does describe the beliefs of many sensible people outside of the core promoters.

(I try to capitalize it when talking about the political movement, and use other terms when I'm not. Before ID became common parlance, there were plenty of people in the "however it is, that's how God made it" camp who didn't have an umbrella term to use. It's unfortunate that the tidiest and most accurate-sounding phrase available was designed by a bunch of crazy people.)

Yeah, it's too bad, because there's nothing unreasonable about believing that God is working within the framework of natural laws to shape the Universe to some plan.

I agree that this is very reasonable. But this position adapts the concept of God's agency to fit the realities of the world as we know it. What creationism and its ID sockpuppet do is to adapt the realities of the world as we know it to their preexisting concept of God's agency.

And in cosmology news, Bad Milky Way! No biscuit!

Nearly a million stars seem to have gone missing from the nearby globular cluster Messier 12, located within the constellation Ophiuchus. Our own Milky Way, scientists say, may be to blame.

How do they explain the structure of the human back or knee? Do they consider these to be the designs of an all knowing creator?

You'd have to ask them, but I assume you'd follow up with what appear to be obvious flaws in the structure of the back or knee and, consequently, the creator of same was unintelligent or non-existent, to which I'd counter the usual human understanding vs. divine understanding, to which you'd counter with that's a cop-out and can be used to answer any argument, to which I'd counter plausibility, and we could continue ad infinitum.

While I'm happy to debate the existence of G*d for hours on end, I can tell you for a fact that some educated people actually and genuinely believe in His existence. Your previous statement questioned the integrity of people very close to me by saying that either they don't know human anatomy woth a damn, or they're lying about their belief in a Creator. I'm not sure if you understand why that can be construed as a little offensive, although I'm sure you didn't mean it that way.

I am sorry for being a bit touchy today.

Nearly a million stars seem to have gone missing from the nearby globular cluster Messier 12, located within the constellation Ophiuchus. Our own Milky Way, scientists say, may be to blame.

That's right, you don't f*ck with our galaxy or you'll get a full can of star-stealing whoopass.

Nearly a million stars seem to have gone missing from the nearby globular cluster Messier 12, located within the constellation Ophiuchus. Our own Milky Way, scientists say, may be to blame.

Mmmmm..... Globular clusters.... </Homer>

That encouraged scientists to go and develop a computer model of exactly how the eye evolved, (which it seems to have done about 40 times independently around the animal kingdom). By proving ID wrong, it has increased our understanding of evolution and biology.

Interesting.

But that's separating the idea from the movement. Which I do.

I think this is an important thing to do, because "Intelligent Design" is such a well-designed marketing term that it does describe the beliefs of many sensible people outside of the core promoters.

ita, I wonder if this is where you and I aren't getting each other. Because capital I capital D Intellingent Design, IMO, can't legitimately be separated from the movement. What I don't mean to imply is that "believing that God is working within the framework of natural laws to shape the Universe to some plan" necessarily indicates any connection at all.

I can tell you for a fact that some educated people actually and genuinely believe in His existence.

Sure. That's evident all around me in a scientific environment. I don't see religious scientists having quandries of faith because their work disproves a parable. I haven't met any that take parables about whales and 7 days and ribs and dust as literal, though. If that makes any difference in the argument.

Went to the Dr. What took a total of 3 hours round trip feels like, well something longer and painful. I think the Dr. spent maybe 10 minutes with me, which is not a complaint, just makes me feel like I wasted my time and money going. Result: Virus. Eat more (Toast, Apples, Bananas, and Raisons - the fruit is all new news to me) and drink more, clear liquids. That's it.

After one relapse this morning, the fever does seem to have departed so that is good.

I am good and wiped out though.

I'm all sad about the total and utter tainting of the term "Intelligent Design;" when I first heard it several long years ago, it sounded like a perfectly decent descriptor of people who both believe in God and are down with the Big Bang and evolution and all that smart thinky-people stuff

I'm with JZ. When I first heard of Intelligent Design, many years ago, it basically went something like this: there was a Big Bang, you betcha. But *who* do you think set the Big Bang into motion? That it's perfectly possible that an intelligent creator god designed this universe, and designed it *to evolve.*

I mean, it's scarcely possible that anyone who ever took a human anatomy class really believes that we were designed by an intelligent creator.

I took human anatomy, and, to the contrary, I think the design of the human body and all its systems is *proof* of an intelligent creator.