Intelligent Design debate winds down.... Cut on the Bias responds. I'm not going to say much more-but I have a solution to "Intelligent Design" and "Creationism" and whatever quasi/pseudo/semi/non-scientific "theories" are being propounded out there (since there aren't too many fundamentalist Hindus or New Agers in the voting public, we won't be swamped with too many alternatives). President Bush is an evangelical Christian-he's probably sympathetic to ID. Try and have to him pressure people in the right places to give some grants to ID scientists (to be honest-I doubt there would be more than a dozen takers in biology itself-though I could be wrong) and have them do some research within their new paradigm. We keep saying it's not testable, well let's see. After a decade or two-maybe they'll get tired of it. I mean, most of the solutions involve introducing ID as an "alternative" in secondary schools-but what the hell is a marginal but possibly ground-breaking (and if ID pans out-it would be ground-breaking) theory doing getting its start in high schools?!?! In the end, ideology won't matter. Uniformitarianism defeated Catastrophism no matter the entrenched modes of thought. And the United States is after all one country among many-I'm sure China will be doing plenty of research in the area of evolution throughout this century. P.S.: I believe a significant minority of biologists would admit to a belief in a supernatural being that is an intelligent designer. But only a precious few would try to spin this into a scientific theory. From the cosmic scale of galaxy formation toward the miniature level of the quark-theists ultimately see the hand of the Creator for by definition God is the Ground of Being. But it seems only an atheist would strive to "know the mind of God." But the ID crowd beg to differ I suppose....