"Without the binding assumption of
uninterruptible natural law there would be
absolute chaos in the scientific worldview.
Supernatural explanations undermine the
discipline that allows science to make
progress. It is not that supernatural agents
and powers could not explain in principle, it
is rather that they can explain all too
easily." (Pennock, R.T., 2000, "Tower of
Babel", pp. 294)

"God works, as they say, in mysterious ways.
We cannot have any privy knowledge of God's
will, and those who have tried to claim it are
quickly brought back to earth. When the
complex Ptolemaic epicycle theory of the
planetary system was explained to Alphonso X,
King of Castile, with its equant points,
eccentrics, deferents, and epicycles -wheels
upon wheels within offset wheels- he is
reported to have commented that "if God had
consulted him at the creation, the universe
should have been on a better and simpler
plan." Defending the complexity of his
theoretical models from another critic who
made the same point, Ptolemy is said to have
replied, "You may complain that these models
are not simple, but from the point of view of
God, who knows what is simple?" And, of
course, Ptolemy was right; we cannot say that
our notion of simplicity is at all relevant to
what God's might be, or even if God values
simplicity at all. Scientific models must be
judged on natural grounds of evidence, for we
have no supernatural ground upon which we can
stand since any such ground is necessarily a
mystery to us." (Pennock, 2000, pp. 290)

"Intelligent design is three things: a
scientific research program that investigates
the effects of intelligent causes; an
intellectual movement that challenges
Darwinism and its naturalistic legacy; and a
way of understanding divine action.
Intelligent design therefore intersects
science and theology." (Dembski, W.A.,
1999, "Intelligent Design", pp. 13)

"The crucial breakthrough of the intelligent
design movement has been to show that this
great theological truth -that God acts in the
world by dispersing information- also has
scientific content." (Dembski, 1999, pp. 233)

"A significant factor in the acceptance of
Johnson's "Darwin on Trial" (1991) and "Reason
in the Balance" (1995) in the North American
evangical community relates directly to the
way he presents his arguments. His three
foundational principles are so tightly
interwoven throughout his writings that it
becomes nearly impossible for the reader to
distinguish them, and this opens the door for
the problem of the conflation of ideas. When
this happens a poorly rationalized idea can
be "justified" simply by being placed
alongside a powerful truth. ... This
phenomenon of the conflation of ideas is
operating in Johnson's writings with regard to
his three foundational principles. As I
affirmed earlier, with qualification,
Johnson's first two principles are powerful
and clearly welcomed by all Christians: (1) an
attack against naturalism and materialism, (2)
support for intelligent design in the
universe. However, I caution readers not to
conflate these two powerful ideas with
Johnson's third foundational principle -the
complete failure of the modern theory of
biological evolution." (Lamoureux, "Evangicals
Inheriting the Wind: The Phillip E. Johnson
Phenomenon", in Johnson, P.E. & Lamoureux,
D.O. et al., 1999, "Darwinism Defeated?", pp.
25, 26)

"Now consider a human subject S confronted
with sequences (A) and (B). S comes to the
these sequences with considerable background
knowledge which, we may suppose, includes the
following:

(1) Nicholas Caputo is a Democrat.
(2) Nicholas Caputo would like to see the
Democrats appear first on the ballot since
having the first place on the ballot line
significantly boosts one's chances of
winning an election.
(3) Nicholas Caputo, as election commissioner
of Essex County, has full control over who
appears first on the ballots in Essex
County.
(4) Election commissioners in the past have
been guilty of all manner of fraud,
including unfair assignments of ballot
lines.
(5) If Captuto were assigning ballot lines
fairly, then both Democrats and
Republicans should recieve priority
roughly the same number of times.

Given the background knowledge S is in a
position to formulate various "cheating
patterns" by which Caputo migh attempt to give
the Democrats first place on the ballot."
(Dembski, W.A., 1998, "The Design Inference",
pp. 16)

"The appeal to supernatural forces, whether
these are taken to be divine or occult, is
always available for we can cite no necessary
constraints upon the powers of supernatural
agents. This is just the picture of God that
Johnson presents. He says that God could
create out of nothing or use evolution if He
wanted; God is "omnipotent." He says God
creates in the "furtherance of a purpose," but
that God's purposes are "inscrutable"
and "mysterious." A god that is all-powerful
and whose will is inscrutable can be called
to "explain" *any* event in any situation, and
this is one reason for science's
methodological prohibition against such
appeals. Given this feature, supernatural
hypotheses remain immune from
disconformation." (Pennock, 2000, pp. 291-2,
original emphasis)