Originally posted by: mage
He also (stupidly) adds that a little more or a little less gravity would destroy anything on the planet or the planet itself (he says the planet would come unglued and fly apart if there were not enough gravity).
I beleive the whole gravity argument was referring to the fact that the amount of gravity that earth applies to everything on it is the right amount to sustain everything on it (the pea example), and if the sun (or any other body) applied more or less gravity to earth, then the earth would leave its orbit (and fly off into space; or a whole bunch of other shit would be affected - the tides for example). It's eternally set to the "right" amount. That's what I see it's trying to say.

Keep in mind mage that this is a news article, and many of the proponents of ID they interview or refer to are (to quote) "people with serious academic training. They are Ph.D.s from very, not just reputable -- but elite -- institutions. And they are people doing research on the key pressure points in biology and physics, and so their arguments are based on cutting-edge knowledge of developments in science."

Beleive what you will about ID, I think the real issue is stuff like this (most of which has already been discussed in this thread):
West remarked that "hate speech, speech codes, outright persecution, and discrimination is taking place on our college campuses, in our school districts, against both students and teachers and faculty members."

In fact, universities are evolving into centers for censorship. Five years ago, Baylor University dismissed mathematician Dr. William Dembski from his position, primarily because he headed a center for ID there.
Also...
Walter L. Bradley got a Ph.D in materials science from UT Austin
Hook 'em.