I think it's politically advantageous to those who want to shoe horn religion into the schools. It is a way of obfuscating that could be effective, in the short run. But there may be a danger to their side in this approach, I think. Pure faith may be a better way to go with fundamentally flawed proposals at "explanation" in the long run. I call it "flawed" if it doesn't answer a question, but merely pushes the question up one level. That is, it becomes, Then who or what made the intelligent designer? In what resides "His" intelligence? Does "He" have a brain? A body? With what religion is "He" most closely affiliated? How could we know what "He" had, or has, in mind? What is "He," exactly? Why should "He" be worshipped? Is "He" good or evil, given what "He" allows to happen to innocents? etc...
It's nice, though, to see the Creationists being abandoned by their "scientists." It had to happen this way.
BTW, I won't be around later today, or tonight. (For all I know, i won't be around for longer than that, lol!) |
