PC enthusiasts debate ID

[Back again after a long dry spell.]
Today I happened across an article about the nipped-in-the-bud El Tejon, California, excursion into the “evolution wars” in -- of all places -- Ars Technica, a site I sometimes visit for computer industry news.

In “Intelligent Design as Philosophy Fails,” John Timmer goes into some detail about the disputed “Philosophy of Design” course and observes that

Much of the course material comes straight from the pro-ID think tank the Discovery Institute. This isn't necessarily a problem — if I were teaching a course entitled "ID is scientifically vacuous", I'd be relying on Discovery Institute materials as well. More of a concern are the qualifications of the teacher of this class — namely, that she has none. With a background in sociology and special education, she admits she isn't especially qualified in science or philosophy, and that the syllabus was a mess because the course was designed in a rush. She does apparently have a reason for leaping into the fray: "I believe that this is the class that the Lord wanted me to teach."

Particularly notable is the volume of discussion that follows the article – five long pages and counting. I’ve spent a lot of time in the past year reading the same blogs that are frequented by the same people. Interesting seeing some commentary from a different audience. Well, not all that different. A little less heated, but there is only so much you can say on this topic.