"World Traveler" wrote in message
. net...

ID and solid data? That's unlikely. The basic philosophy behind ID is
that it is an alternative to solid data -- that using data is a
non-starter because they don't conform to the ID preconcept.

In addition, there is no agreed-to actual hypothesis for ID, so there is
no point in trying to argue individual points. The statements on ID that
I've seen include:

The universe was created 6,000 years ago.
Man and dinosaurs coexisted.
Noah's flood was worldwide.
Noah included the dinosaurs in the complement of animals on the ark.
The "Big Bang" is false because it doesn't explain what was before the
Bang,
. . . etc.

That would be one interpretation. Yet another would be that all known
societies have explanations for the "creation" of the universe and the
origin of life. Jews of the 6th century BC had a couple (yep, read
Genesis), the societies with who the coexisted had others. I presume you
use Jewish creation stories as a tacit acknowledgement that this nation was
created by people who shared their beliefs? Or is it because you're
unfamiliar with Hindu creation?

It's important to consider and teach that most all societies consider the
human as the highest form of life, the one the gods love, unlike the modern
types who claim a snail darter species coequal to a human. Teachings to
provide perspective and background for understanding, not right, wrong, or
even in final form, just like scientific investigation.