Agence France-Presse reports:
The US science community is embroiled in a caustic fight over the theory that a higher intelligence and not Darwinist evolution is largely responsible for life on Earth.Now, it's true that a few scientists who should know better, like Lehigh University biochemistry professor Michael Behe, propound untestable hypotheses of "intelligent design". But to say that the whole American scientific community is "embroiled in a caustic fight" over the validity of evolution is simply untrue.
In fact, the article itself explains that intelligent design's support comes from "a handful of biologists and non-scientists". Yet it goes on to claim that intelligent design "has put Darwinists on the defensive", warning that "the debate has become more rancorous in recent months."
Yeah, sure it has. This is about as much of a debate as a parent telling a child he can't have ice cream before dinner. The kid can whine all he wants, but he's not getting any ice cream.
But wait! Later on, we find another reversal:
Amid growing animosity, both sides agree that proving intelligent design in traditional scientific terms is next to impossible.Translation: Intelligent design is not a scientific theory. It's religious faith wearing a lab coat.
Why is AFP puffing up a handful of true believers into a credible scientific challenge? Is it all just a clumsy attempt to make U.S. scientists look like bible-thumpin' hicks?