The truth is this: very few people argue over the truth of evolution and natural selection, if that means a wholesale rejection of both evolution and natural selection. What has most people riled up is the philosophy of Universal Darwinism - the philosophy that claims that everything in physics and biology can be explained by evolution and that evolution necessarily implies atheism.
The tilde, in a sense it is negation. It is the symbol for sarcasm, wry wit or double entendre. If you move to the thread under part 3 of Joe's article, you will see that I am having some trouble with it.
I tend to lean towards Universal Darwinism, but I don't think that criticizing Universal Darwinism is necessarily anti-scientific. I do think that ID theorists should realize that their criticisms are more philosophical than scientific. Experimental science has little use for the kind of criticisms that ID theorists make.
I get it now. Nice article, but despite his testimony, creationists actually believe in natural selection. I don't know for sure, in light of that, what it is they are really bitching about. God I guess.
