JOE MEERT What good is ID? I went to a talk here yesterday by Carl Zimmer. For those who don't know, Zimmer is an award winning science journalist who authored the book "Evolution: Triumph of an Idea". The book served as a companion to the PBS series on evolution. Zimmer's talk was average, but he made a number of good points that resonated with the audience. He asked the rhetorical question; "What good are the pretenders to the throne-namely ID and young earth creation". He noted that most ID'ers (Discovery Institute ilk) hold a position that is anathema to ye-creationism (namely old earth) but that they are both religious movements. In fact, one need only look at the Discovery Institute's logo to see who they think the ID'er is! The second point he made, that has been made (and ignored here and on other boards) is that ID has produced no science at all. There are no scientific publications on ID. Scientists are not using ID in their research. In fact, the point was made that not even Behe uses ID in his scientific publications. It's a religiously based socio-political agenda or Paley in a new coat and tophat. The ID bunch spend their time criticizing evolution rather than publishing the basics of their 'alleged' better alternative. In short, there is no scientific basis for ID, it is all politically driven.