zrocks and others: ID was invented by creationists in order to create a "debate" where none existed. Within the scientific academic works, there is NO debate that evolution occurs, or that it is responsible for what we see today. The "debate" was manufactured in order to appeal to peoples' sense of fairness. Where there is no debate, one can create one by saying "Well, let's look at both sides of the argument and let the reader decide!" Well, simply put, there is no other side apart from raw creationism. ID is a political tool meant to reduce the influence of science by fabricating a "debate" where none exists.

Read the so-called "Wedge Document" , written by the Discovery Institute, one of the premier ID think-tanks in the US. It spells out their goals in plain view for all to see.

The fabricated debate is a clever tool for giving disproportionate face time to a small group of fanatics. Think about it, this can be done about anything: We all love the DA7. But what if one or two people believe that digital mixing boards cause cancer? Of course, this is a ludicrous belief, but by claiming that "both sides of the debate" need to be heard, this small group creates a controversy where there was none before. Putting ID on the same ground as evolution is completely ridiculous. They are entirely separate disciplines, and furthermore ID has, to date, made no predictions or hypotheses, nor has a single shred of evidence popped up supporting its cause. Attempting to frame this as a "debate" is just a trick, an attempt to fool people into thinking they are being fair when in fact they are falling for a ruse.