Why Does ID Criticize TE?



Thank you for your response. You would concur, then, that for BioLogos supporters who are zealous about God guiding Evolution, and reject Darwinism, the camps are becoming ever more close together?



In my admittedly limited experience, plus a 1000+ page volume of critique, it seems that most ID thinkers criticize EC.

I’d say that’s correct.


Yes indeed. Like I said, it seems the one sticking point is “detectability by science,” and even that seems to do more with how you define science. When it comes to that, it Big Endians making war on Little Endians.

And I should add that I’ve long been one of those: I’ve posted on BioLogos, and I’ve posted on Uncommon Descent, and been equally liked or hated on both.


@swamidass, this isn’t true, by the way.


Yup, he clarified. I’ll change my original post. Thanks.


6 posts were merged into an existing topic: ID and Science Classes


Is that because there isn’t much ‘movement’ left anymore that one could leave? :rofl: Already retirement of Dembski, departure of Luskin, the Brazil fiasco (with Behe repeating old lines as if new ones aren’t needed). Denton is there for the paycheck (having been the one who woke Behe up with his misnomer crisis talk), not for the Intelligent Designer, as far as rumour has it. The ‘ID community’ has lost momentum; that at least cannot easily be denied.

The answer to the title question is easy: Why do IDists criticize TE? Because it splits the vote, and away from their favour. They are minorities and will remain that way. They tried to ideologize with Intelligent Design, but have largely failed. Their conceptualistic game is up. Outside of the CSC’s few novelties with Intelligent Design Theory, the other links, historical and philosophical with creationism are too obvious to ignore and too easy to point out.

It is just no longer fresh and can’t be much fun to be an IDist anymore. The best ones don’t.