what is "scientific evidence?" how is it different from "evidence?"

What is meant by *constitutional* neutrality?

The problem here is that the promotion of "the scientific evidence of intelligent design" by definition is counter to "scientific objectivity" (i.e. controlled observation of natural phenomena), because it is necessitated by and has grown out of a religious belief system (specifically a naively literalist reading of Hebrew scripture). The fallacy here is straight disingenuousness.

There is little in these comments that cannot be labelled as fallacies...(sigh)