Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Intelligent design/Archive1

November 1, 2005 This article makes Wikipedia look bad; it's that simple. It is not doing justice to this site. I was dissapointed in reading this article on ID. It is not the standard objective type of writing in Wikipedia and I think it should be changed to read neutral. It's obviously written by someone with very strong feelings against ID and that comes across too clearly. ID is accepted by the scientific community because ID is made of scientists. That's why it's so controversial -the scientists are fighting the scientists. That the 'other', older, larger scientific community does not accept ID is true. In any case, please be neutral. It doesn't need to advocate ID anymore than it needs to say it's bologna. Inform your reader; don't push your views down our throats.

ID is faith based not reason based
Intelligent design is the idea that it is so unlikely that life evolved on earth under the natural laws, that something impossible under the natural laws must have happened. This statement is not logical, nothing can ever be so unlikely that it is impossible. I do not think there is any neutral ground for ID, not as long as it continues to claim to be science or reason.