2 parts

One

#1

“This demonstrates that ID is clearly a religious movement.”

This is a hasty generalization. Where I placed this statement in my paper I had not yet provided sufficient evidence to argue that it is clearly a religious movement. I would change this to:

These statements suggest that the motives of the ID movement have a religious basis.

#2

“When the Court held that evolution could be taught, conservative Christian groups entertained a new strategy, which was to push for the teaching of  ‘creation science’ alongside evolution.”

This statement may be an example of false cause. There appears to be a link in time between the two events which could be interpreted as cause and effect, but might not necessarily be so.

It is interesting to note that when the Court held that evolution could be taught, conservative Christian groups entertained a new strategy, which was to push for the teaching of  ‘creation science’ alongside evolution.

Two

My poster will contain various categories. The title is “Intelligent Design’s Changing Faces.” Sections include: what ID is, religious movement, creationism, history of movement, attacking evolution, becoming a science, not being a science, the wedge document, the popularity of the movement, the future and the truth. There will be a timeline of the picturing the ID movement’s progression of terminology.