In Evolution Suit, a Web of Faith, Law and Science
Mr. Thompson said his side would prove that intelligent design was not creationism because it did not mention God or the Bible and never posited the creator's identity.
"It's clear they are two different theories," Mr. Thompson said. "Creationism normally starts with the Holy Scripture, the Book of Genesis, then you develop a scientific theory that supports it, while intelligent design looks at the same kind of empirical data that any scientist looks at," and concludes that complex mechanisms in nature "appear designed because it is designed."
It's like the entire world has flipped its brain on hold and is running around like a bunch of crazed lemmings.
Some people see things as they are and say, "why?"
Creationists see things as they never were and say, "Why not?"
Glad you're still alive and kicking after Katrina and Rita... :)
How does one define the appearance of being designed, and how does this square with the notion that no god outside of sci-fi (or SubGenius, take your pick) has the temperament to piece together googles upon googles of quanta to form galactic clusters, pretty flowers, AND rectums? Eh?