front loading: did evos get it backwards

Yes, that's how I understood it as well. For some time I've been thinking that this sort of thing will be the future of I.D., and it will become an attack on the abiogenesis hypotheses rather than the theory of evolution. An I.D.er/blogger called Mike Gene seems to be the best known advocate of this kind of thing.He is what his fellow I.D.er, randman, would call an "evo".

I see. A broad church or, to put it another way, lots of different Gods of the gaps.The reason I think that this kind of thing is becoming popular is because the Michael Behe "IC" idea has failed, which means that the more scientifically literate of the I.D. advocates need to shift their designer's field of operations further "backwards', if you see what I mean.For example, it wouldn't be easy for an I.D.er to support Behe on the blood clotting thread I've just put up.So, I think that lots of the cleverer creationists that we'll see arriving on EvC in the future will be front loaders.Randman's hedging his bets, as usual, which is a smart thing to do when there's no evidence around for the designer, front-loader or otherwise. (Smart?! That's a surprise compliment for you, randman. Don't blush.)