Oh no, Jimmah, panspermiare: #641 Jimmah

Even taking ID completely at face value and ignoring everything we KNOW about it’s being a mere front for creationism, ID is nevertheless just creationism spread over time. It’s still creationism. It still contends that the laws of nature cannot produce the biological diversity we see around us, and it plugs the gaps it imagines/asserts with god-magic.

OK, so you have a form of creationism (in this case, Behe’s personal take on ID) that asserts universal common descent by modification through deep time. Sorry: that ain’t creationism, unless you are willing to say that just about any theist other than a strict Deist is a creationist. If you are, that’s fine with me, but it makes “creationism” a much less useful term.

I agree that Behe’s personal ideas about the mechanism of universal common descent by modification through deep time are much more treligion than science, but that isn’t the same as calling them ‘creationist”.