Bugsy I think All is the only person I have ever come across who supports ID myth as ID theory for the purpose and enjoyment of exploring the concept. The indicator is that All has included Aliens and spaceships within the explanation and has not discounted the Mad Hatter, the dreamtime serpent, songs of inverted sirens or poly-existent geometry as rivals of a god as intelligent designer. Intelligent Design afterall is a series of missing links which are no more than fantasy.

All is rare in mythological discourse. The rest are serving a cynical political agenda constructed to exploit children to artificially discredit science in order to drag the western world back into the dark ages.

In this agenda creationists are allied with Islamists. Christianity has become in most cases and is becoming in the rest of cases the political wing of Islamic terrorism.

It is striking West that even if those that claim That the Evolutionary Hypothesis has some merit, then in turn it would be a logical conclusion they have belief in other Life forms in our Universe; Yes?

Unless we are intended to be here- and on purpose; and we know how much that upsets some people.

No Aliens West, the physics are Impossibility, even using the most Flamboyant of Mathematicians corrupt equations.

A New Darwinism? http://www.stephenjaygould.org/reviews/dennett_exchange.html

Darwinian Fundamentalism http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1151

And of course ; A chronology of Life elsewhere in the Universe.
The Drake equation states that:
N= R* x fp x ne x fl x fi x fc x L

Where:
N is the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which we might expect to be able to communicate at any given time
And
R* is the rate of star formation in our galaxy
fp is the fraction of those stars that have planets
ne is average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets
fl is the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life
fi is the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life
fc is the fraction of the above that are willing and able to communicate
L is the expected lifetime of such a civilizatio

Interestingly Dr Evil just posted an Essay on :" In defense of the Truth"; http://democracyfrontline.org/blog/?p=1834
Interesting?

www.talkorigins.org <---- learn...

It appears that West is obsessed and insecure by his petty attacks ID and lacks the true mind of science - an open minded possibility ID might just explain codependent species.

I've been involved in selective genetic breeding of animals and plants under Dr Gothel during the 1960's and never once did we create a new species. For instance on several occasions we reverted back to the original wild tomato from Brazil to selectively breed new breeds because inbreeding of new breeds - hybreds failed to reproduce. However new breeds were always from the gene pool of tomatoes. Wheat was always wheat though it had different characteristics. However to introduce omega 3 for instance into a species it does not happen by selective breeding but by laboratory scientific interferrence.

That site is Scary Spendocrat; but it does help explain things a bit.
I tell you what, here is a link to Charles Darwin Bio, and if you activate his name in the top line, it will bring you to about 27 of his published works. All in Electronic book form.
That’s for a start;
I have about 40 more installments of other works.
All of which predate 1950ies.
On line web sites are very suspect; please forgive me if I remain skeptical about The Talk approach to the subject, it sounds like a rabid puppy off its leash biting everyone who does not agree or has more science than fiction to back their Hypothesis, but I do detect in some syntax of commentary where they find a particular Indoctrination approach.

If ever there is a methodology to refute ether for; or against that would be the last place that I would visit for informed opinion.
Probably look in Cambridge or Oxford Publications and Journals plus Archives.
And a few specific Professors and Doctors
Only a few of more credible credentialed opinions and scientific findings; They were not on a Mission about screwing peoples Brains up back then.
Un like Now days.
Anyway here are the Charles Darwin publications.
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/2010

Wow Philo, breeding tomatoes in the 60's! I am very impressed, I guess you'd know all about evolution then. So, I reckon you wouldn't be impressed at all by this then.

http://www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v92/n5/abs/6800432a.html