Respectful Insolence

Everybody wants to get in on the act

Enough, already!

Over the last couple of days, we’ve had Signs You Might Be an Intelligent Design Critic.

Next, we had You May Be an Intelligent Design Supporter If…

Just remember who got the ball rolling with these silly Jeff Foxworthy-inspired lists way back in January 2005 and updated it shortly after landing here at ScienceBlogs.

Alright, I’m a little envious. I wish I had thought of this list. I guess, though, I’ll console myself with the fact that I do have one “You might be an X if…” sort of list to my credit.

And, I have to confess, I found a couple of these amusing, such as, “You might be an ID supporter if”:

38. You think that “Darwinism” is not a valid scientific theory because it is fundamentally unfalsifiable.

37. You think that “Darwinism” is not a valid scientific theory because it has been repeatedly falsified.

And this one:

29. You blame the theory of evolution for war, rape, the Holocaust, bestiality, racism, the high cost of gasoline, and the fact that you never seem to notice that the toilet paper roll is empty until after it’s too late.

(I’ll give Krauze credit for coming up with a fairly amusing riff on this one.)

But, I think, this one probably sums it up better than the rest (with the exception of #1, but you’ll have to go to the site to see that one; it isn’t fair for me to repost more than a few of these):

16. You think that if a farmer prays for rain, and then a weather forecaster predicts rain, and then it rains, that means God was involved somehow, but if evolution is an incredibly sophisticated and well-designed mechanism for producing natural diversity using the natural laws ordained by the Creator, that means God was not involved.