I have been trying to find material on what creationists think is the
future if the ID creationist scam. At this time it seems to have
petered out and there hasn't been a group of creationist rubes stupid
enough to want to try and teach the bogus junk for nearly 4 years. The
two states that still have switch scam junk at the state level (Texas
and Louisiana) haven't tried to implement the switch scam at the state
level since both states had the bait and switch run on them about a
month apart back in 2013 (yes, 8 years where the switch scam has been
dormant or under the table). Both states wanted to put ID/creationism
into textbook supplements. Both states had written up these
supplements, and they claimed that they were not mandating teaching
intelligent design (Louisiana even called it intelligent design and
creationism in their supplements) but they wanted to give teachers the
information that they would need in order to teach the subject if they
wanted to. The ID perps ran the bait and switch and had to remind the
rubes that the obfuscation switch scam that both Texas and Louisiana had
bent over for was supposed to have nothing to do with ID/creationism.
It is only supposed to be an obfuscation scam to keep the kids as
ignorant as possible about the relevant science. The creationist rubes
backed down and bent over and took it again because neither state
dropped the switch scam, but IDiocy seems to be a dead issue in those
states for the last 8 years. You don't hear much about the switch scam
because creationist rubes don't like it. The last thing that they want
to do is teach their kids enough science for them to understand what we
know and what we don't know at this time.
This Christian Post article reviewed the issue in 2020. The conclusion
seemed to be that IDiocy had no future worth discussing, and I can't
find any further discussion on the future of IDiocy since. The Reason
To Believe creationists claim to be working on their intelligent design
creation model, but you can't find a summary of the model anywhere. All
you find are articles on how they are developing the model and what
types of evidence they are using. They actually admit to basing as much
as possible on the Bible because they believe that the model has to be
consistent with their religious beliefs. They don't seem to be any more
scientific than the scientific creationists, but just seem to be old
earth creationists with a different interpretation of the Bible.
I did find an article that may be of interest to some on TO. It is
written by Fuller (The one pro IDiot witness for the Dover defense that
wasn't directly tied to the ID creationist scam). Most of his testimony
was used to demonstrate that IDiocy wasn't much of any science worth
Fuller wrote this 10 years after Dover. It turns out that his support
for the ID creationist scam was due to his misinterpretation of what the
situation actually was by 2005. He notes that science education changed
in the 1960, but he gets what changed, wrong. He claims that it was the
science side excluding religion from the science classroom that got the
IDiot/creationists up in arms. The actual reality was that the
religious restrictions were removed in order to teach legitimate
science. Sputnik gave the public the idea that we were behind in our
science education, and there was an improvement in science textbooks,
and science education expectations. The anti evolution laws were struck
down so that you could actually teach biology in the biology classes.
It was this loss of control over the curriculum that got the
creationists upset enough to try to block the teaching of biological
evolution in any way that they thought that they could get away with.
The creationists came up with their two model approach in order to limit
their kid's exposure to what they didn't want them to be taught. The
obfuscation switch scam that the ID perps make the rubes bend over for,
is expected to do the same thing. IDiots don't want their kids to learn
about biological evolution, and if the topic is mentioned they want it
to be mentioned negatively. That is the reality of the switch scam that
the IDiots get instead of any ID science to teach. There never was any
ID creation science that the ID perps nor the scientific creationists
wanted to teach. Really, neither group developed any legitimate
creation science. All both groups ended up doing was trying to deny the
You just have to look at the Texas example. When the bait and switch
went down the Texas IDiots understood that they were not going to teach
any ID science in their public schools so they bent over for the
obfuscation switch scam, but most of them didn't like the switch scam.
McLeroy (led the state school board when the switch scam was being
implemented) had a lot of creationist proposals and some of them
included removing topics from the science standards. The creationist
school board did not want things like the Big Bang and biological
evolution to be required science topics. They discussed doing the same
thing that Kansas had done at the turn of the century and drop subjects
that they didn't want taught from the science standards. There were
protests from relevent individuals who were actually interested in
science education, and a lot of that junk was never implemented. What
they ended up with was a wishy washy switch scam policy that IDiots were
not satisfied with, and the first chance they got to implement the
policy they screwed up and wanted to teach IDiocy.
The whole ploy since the bait and switch was started by the ID perps in
2002 was to limit the kid's exposure to the science that ID/creationists
did not like. This had been what they did before the 1960's and was
what creationists have tried to do since they lost control and could not
block teaching the science that they did not agree with.
So Fuller got involved in the ID scam for the wrong reasons, and his own
testimony supported this conclusion because he understood that there
wasn't any ID science to teach, so what did he think that the ID perps
were trying to do? The bait and switch had been going down for over 3
years by the time Fuller testified. The ID perps were not giving anyone
any ID science to teach.
Fuller had missed the boat, and thought that this was some type of
philosophical issue when it has always been the creationist's attempt to
control the religious education of their kids. The only reason science
is involved is because the creationists do not like the science that
gets taught in science classes.
The Thomas More lawyer defending the IDiots knew that the bait and
switch had been going down since Ohio. He called it a strategy, but it
is just the old bait and switch scam. You sell the rubes one thing, but
when they come in to get it you only give them something else that they
didn't want to buy.
This was the More lawyers response to the 'Discovery Institute ID perp
lying about the Discovery Institute never advocating teaching
So that caused us some concern about exactly where was the heart of the
Discovery Institute. Was it really something of a tactical decision, was
it this strategy that they've been using, in I guess Ohio and other
places, where they've pushed school boards to go in with intelligent
design, and as soon as there's a controversy, they back off with a
compromise. And I think what was victimized by this strategy was the
Dover school board, because we could not present the expert testimony we
thought we could present
Why didn't Fuller know that the bait and switch had gone down on every
single IDiot rube that had wanted to teach ID in the public schools?
Before Dover the ID perps had a list of school boards and legislators
who they claim had bent over for the switch scam. My recollection is
that there were over 20 examples by 2005 on that list, but the only
rubes that I recall doing anything about the switch scam had been Ohio,
Kansas, Louisiana and Texas. The ID perps even complained that the
Dover rubes would not bend over for the switch scam because they had
already acquired their "free" legal defense.
By 2010 he should have known that the bait and switch had kept going
down after Dover and it will go down again if there are any rubes stupid
enough to believe their Teach ID propaganda pamphlet that they just
updated this year.
Fuller should have known that no one was ever going to get any ID
science to teach no matter how the ID perps kept lying about the issue.
What has become of intelligent design - and its opponents?
Intelligent design is alive and well, but it has begun the sort of
process that normally happens to radical ideas that eventually become
assimilated into mainstream inquiry. Think about the history of
sociology. The original "sociologists" were people like Auguste Comte,
Karl Marx and Herbert Spencer. None of them called a university his
home. All were public intellectuals with substantial audiences based on
what established authorities regarded as an unholy mix of science and
politics. Over time, the "science" bits were extracted and
institutionalized - away from the "politics" bits. Thus, in the hands of
Emile Durkheim and others, sociology came to name an academic discipline
rather than a social movement.
While I don't predict that "intelligent design" will ever name a
distinct academic discipline, I'm confident that it will inform many of
them - even in the life sciences. The more we advance in redrafting the
blueprints of nature, the less likely that this ability could have
arisen purely by chance. This is not to say, theologically speaking,
that God doesn't play dice; rather, he plays dice biased in our favour.
How we play the hand we're dealt by the dice is, of course, another
matter. In this context, I would point to two developments.
Remember Fuller wrote this in 2015. How could anyone be so wrong about
the creationist ID scam and what it had become. All ID ever will be is
the bait and switch scam because the ID perps have never bothered to
produce any ID science to give to the rubes. IDiots like Glenn only
want to be lied to, and no IDiot creationist is ever going to get any ID
science when they need it. No IDiot creationist has ever gotten any ID
science from the ID perps, and there are no prospects for that to change.
Put bluntly, intelligent design theory began its modern existence as the
ideology of the liberal middle class - the "can do" sort of people who
morphed into Unitarians, Transcendentalists and New Agers. This helps to
explain the general lack of enthusiasm in more traditional Christian
precincts for intelligent design: the fit between God and humanity is
just too close for comfort.
It has been pretty well established that IDiocy sprang from the demise
of scientific creationism as a viable option. The ID perps just
continued the creationist obfuscation and denial. No ID science was
ever produced that would differentiate IDiocy from scientific
creationism. In fact the scientific creationist had already failed
using what the ID perps call their Top Six evidences of IDiocy. All six
had already been used as god-of-the-gaps denial stupidity by the
scientific creationists. It looks like Fuller is just another
creationist rube that wants to be lied to and has been willing to remain
willfully ignorant of what the situation actually is in order to justify
The bait and switch is what alienates most traditional Chrisitians.
There hasn't been a group of creationist rubes that bent over and
implemented the switch scam in over a decade. They have all dropped the
issue once the bait and switch goes down. Texas was the last example of
switch scam implementation, and they had to have the bait and switch
rerun on them again in 2013. If that doesn't put off the IDiot rubes
Clergy letter project that Fuller seems to be oblivious of. You can
still find statements from clergy that signed the letter voicing their
disapproval of intelligent design there. The letter started as a
response to the creationist ID scam.
Fuller never seems to have figured out why most Christians aren't
interested in the intelligent design creationist scam. It has just been
a bait and switch scam that creationists have been running on
themselves since 2002. Past IDiots like ex Senator Santorum have
dropped IDiocy and gone back to calling what they support plain old