Okay! I just got done with the blog article you wrote:
Intelligent Design is NOT Anti-Evolution- The Debate Begins (April 2011)
I do congratulate you on designing an essay outline that steers clear of the maximum number of problems! But, frankly, it seems that in the process of writing the article, you came to learn almost nothing about BioLogos, while you teach your opposition very little about Intelligent Design.
I am not surprised that you chose the topic of whether or not ID is anti-Evolution.
1) Why isn't BioLogos mentioned even once in your writing?
2) You do know that many BioLogos supporters, like me for example, believe God guided the course of Evolution, right?
3) So what is the difference between the ID camp and many BioLogos supporters? BioLogos supporters are virtually unanimous on the position favoring "Common Descent". Where are the bulk of ID supporters on this issue?
4) In my experience, ID supporters can acknowledge that Evolution is possible, if there is enough time for it - - and that's where they stop. Most ID supporters I've talked to, unlike Behe, continue to oppose an Old Earth scenario!
And this is where I.D. loses me! How can you champion the value of science, and insist that science can prove the existence of an Intelligent Designer - - all at the same time rejecting all the proofs by Science (using multiple methodologies congruently reaching the same conclusion!) that the Earth is five billion years old?!
It's very difficult to consider ID science to rest on solid foundations when the theorists behind I.D. don't even think geology, physics and cosmology is convincing on the age of the Earth !!!
You conclude your article with:
"So the bottom line is Intelligent Design says “evolved, sure”.
**The questions are “evolved from what?” . . . .
Okay, Joe, I'll bite.... from WHAT did the first hominids evolve? What is your personal answer about that?