The question before us was whether anyone but journalists and other amateurs take the science of ID, “daft rube-bait” according to Kevin, seriously.
He knows the common challenges to intelligent design and poses them very articulately, and he’s obviously absorbed Meyer’s books.
Kevin Williamson deploys an absurd reductionist construct of the ID field as consisting of ideological assertions by “lawyers” and “amateurs.”
Of course, an allergy to conceding error is not unique to ID opponents, but it is typical of them.
From otherwise very impassioned and articulate commentators, the silence on this subject is remarkable. Truly, it’s a scandal.