It's been interesting to watch this past week as media pundits have weighed-in on the debate over intelligent design in the wake of President Bush's pro-ID comments. Most of the pundits denouncing intelligent design have simply demonstrated how little they actually know about ID and what it proposes. A good example is Jonathan Alter's snooty anti-ID column in this week's Newsweek. Alter says a lot of ignorant and inaccurate things, but I will focus on just one:

The scholarly articles [by ID proponents] are often well written and provocative. But the science within these papers has been demolished over and over by other scientists.

After paying a back-handed compliment to ID scholars, Alter claims that their scientific arguments have been "demolished" by other scientists. How the heck would Alter know? Has he read ANY of the publications written by pro-ID scientists, including their responses to critics? In fact, "the science within these papers" has NOT been demolished. Rather than trust Alter's unsubstantiated assertion, you can read for yourself some of the responses to the so-called critiques of ID. If you do, you'll be better informed than 99% of the pundits who are pontificating on the subject right now.