Is ID misrepresented by anti-ID Activists?

Of course...but, in many cases where misrepresentation is evident, it is probably the case that the person relaying the information doesn't fully understand ID or the depth of the issues in regard to this controversy. Misunderstanding and misinformation abounds.

Here are just a few blog entries I've posted in the past in regard to the misrepresentation of Intelligent Design. Several are in reference to the science standards circus that occured here in Kansas.

More Media Dishonesty

Humes Lecture Review

Monkey Girl - The Cause of my Evolving Migraine

How misleading can one possibly get

Steve Abrams takes Governor Sebelius to task

Ken Miller at KU

Behe Lecture at KU

Panel Discussion

Behe and Astrology

Unbelievable (the Gonzalez tenure case)

To keep tabs on how often ID is misrepresented, a good source would be Evolution News and Views. They report on the never ending misrepresentations of Intelligent Design on a daily basis.

For the record, I do not think that the scientific community *at large* is part of some deceptive "conspiracy" to do away with Intelligent Design, but rather the misrepresentation comes from those scientists who are completely aborbed in this debate, and the majority of those individuals are philosophical naturalists. But, again, I don't feel that these individuals are "conspiring" against ID.

A "conspiracy" is defined as follows:

a conspiring: an unlawful plot: a conspiring group: to plan together secretly: to commit a crime: to work together toward a single end

The only part of "conspiracy" that I would deem accurate in this case would be the last definition, being "to work together toward a single end". Most certainly, Darwnists are not acting unlawfully or planning together secretly. On any given day, anyone has access to surfing dozens of websites where these issues are being debated and discussed. It is no secret that those who support Darwinian evolution intend to make sure that ID is never considered science.

The bottom line is that these issues go much deeper than mere scientific issues. Opposing worldviews play a large factor in how people perceive these issues and the "facts". Eugenie Scott and the National Center for Science Education head up the attack on the Intelligent Design movement and they really make no secret about their game plan.

The most prominent cases of ID advocates losing their jobs or being censored due to these controversial issues are as follows:

Guillermo Gonzales
Richard Sternburg
Caroline Crocker
Baylor pulls the plug on Evolutionary Informatics Lab