THE NOT SO "INTELLIGENT" DEBATE OVER INTELLIGENT DESIGN -

While the judge in Pennsylvania has said that the argument for teaching intelligent design in school curriculum is a thinly veiled sneak attack by creationists, I believe that the argument must not have been made with enough scientific rigour on our side. First off the argument has been framed as "creation" or "intelligent design" vs. "evolution". In their eagerness to make sure that no mention of religion, or even an indirect reference to a supreme being, is being made I believe the scientific heirarchy has overreached. The true arguments for intelligent design have not been made yet as far as I can tell in the media.

I refer you to an excellent book called "The God Experiment" - Russell Stannard. Written by a religion/science writer for the BBC, the author makes an excellent and well thought out argument for a creator. The complexity of the universe, the causation of the universe (why did it come about at all?), and the very laws of the universe (why are they THESE laws and not something else?) and the information nature of the the building blocks of the universe point out something I have not heard yet in the argument, the "anthropic" principle. That is that the very universe seems to show the fingerprints of a higher personality who designed it. Interestingly enough, none of this DIRECTLY contradicts evolution, we are talking about origins here, not the evolution of species.

So that's why the argument is not being made "intelligently"...