Remember how creationism became “Creation Science”, which then became “Intelligent Design”? (Except that Intelligent Design has now been ruled religion in disguise by a judge.) Apparently William Dembski is proposing creationism’s next iteration – Intelligent Evolution.
It’s also crystal clear from Dembski’s post that all these name changes are just politics and PR:
I therefore offer the following proposal if ID gets outlawed from our public schools: retitle it Intelligent Evolution (IE). The evolution here would be reconceived not as blind evolution but as technological evolution. Nor would it be committed to Darwin’s idea of descent with modification. But, hey, it would still be evolution, and evolution can be taught in schools.
You’ll note he admits it’s nothing more than a name change to squeak his religiously inspired pseudoscience into school science classes. Remember that when we have the inevitable court cases in a couple of years to teach “IE” in school science classes. Note to Dembski – it takes more than changing one word in a name to make something science. Or as Thoughts From Kansas concludes:
…what IDC … really needs isn't motivational speeches and infomercials … but peer-reviewed research consistently showing promise in IDC.
Well duh! But hilariously, Dembski even has this point covered by this wonderful piece of rationalization:
Don’t be distracted by the “thousands” of articles being published in the research journals that purport to support evolutionary theory — this is an artifact of overfunding an underachieving theory.
Yes, all those “thousands of articles” (note the sneer quotes around “thousands”), are merely evidence of over funding of an “underachieving theory”. Obviously. Presumably the total lack of scientific articles supporting ID is evidence of its strength. Or something