In a truly ironic move we are witnessing the evolution of Intelligent Design/Creationism (IDC for short).
As I’ve discussed many times, the ID movement has changed its strategy regarding the policies they are advocating to be adopted by school boards and legislatures. They know that any hint of the phrase “intelligent design” is going to be struck down by the courts, especially in light of the Dover ruling. In fact, they knew this before the Dover ruling ever came down. The big switch really began in Ohio in 2002 in an attempt to make the target too small for our side to attack successfully. Thus, you now have them advocating policies that would not teach ID explicitly.
In one place they may advocate that schools “teach the controversy” over evolution; in another they may advocate that schools teach “the arguments for and against evolution” or “the scientific evidence for and against evolution”; in a third, they may want schools to encourage “critical analysis” or “critical evaluation” of evolution; in a fourth, they may be pushing the idea of teaching “all scientific views about evolution.” All of these phrases mean essentially the same thing – they want the basic arguments that they make against evolution (which is the form that all of their arguments take) taught as valid, they just don’t want them labelled “intelligent design” so as to avoid the scrutiny of the courts.
I also find it rather amazing that there is a group of people who see evolutionary theory as so inimical despite its explanatory power. After all, evolutionary theory explains the changes over time of the Creationists themselves.
On the upside I see this as evidence of Creationism death as a pseudo-scientific theory that will present a challenge to evolutionary theory, at least in school curriculums. I don’t doubt that many people will reject evolutionary theory in favor of their preferred creation myth, it will just be the case that there won’t be any hope that such myths will work their way into the science classroom.
