Politicized Debate

The Weekly Standard joins the fray on ID. At last we know the Darwin debate is politicized (ever since Darwin dabbled in Darwinian commentary on the Crimean War).
The problem is that both sides of the debate are really conservatized ideologies. Poor liberals, always on the wrong side!

The article is suddenly unconvincing, beware, the right will undo the credibility of the sincerely faithful in the ID camp. This politicization will backfire. The only thing one thinks about reading the Weekly Standard is the next election, and the inteligent designers behind the various culture war frauds.



From the article, via Dembski (subscription required at WS)

The Little Engine That Could… Undo Darwinism
By Dan Peterson

What critics of Intelligent Design theory can’t accept is that its proponents are making scientific, fact-based arguments.

The American Spectator, June 2005

IMAGINE A NANOTECHNOLOGY MACHINE far beyond the state of the art: a microminiaturized rotary motor and propeller system that drives a tiny vessel through liquid. The engine and drive mechanism are composed of 40 parts, including a rotor, stator, driveshaft, bushings, universal joint, and flexible propeller. The engine is powered by a flow of ions, can rotate at up to 100,000 rpm (ten times faster than a NASCAR racing engine), and can reverse direction in a quarter of a rotation. The system comes with an automatic feedback control mechanism. The engine itself is about 1/100,000th of an inch wideofar smaller than can be seen by the human eye.