The NAS attempts to deem ID and anything that questions Darwinism as a religious scheme being pushed by "small groups of politically active religious fundamentalists who believe that only a supernatural entity could account for the physical changes in the universe and for the biological diversity of life on Earth".
Ah, yes, we're such an insignificant little group of "fundamentalists", yet the Darwin elite are out in force attempting to stop school districts and univerisities one after the other from questioning their reigning paradigm.
Did I mention that 72.2% of the elite NAS scientists are atheists, 20.8% are agnostic, and only 7% hold a "personal belief in God"?
I don't suppose their worldview or personal philosophical beliefs have anything to do with their perception of the "facts", could they?
Nah...surely not. It's only those religious "fundamentalists" who allow their personal beliefs to interfere with "truth".
No matter, Cornelius Hunter responds with a nice rebuttal at the ID Report. Be sure to give it a read.
Although the NAS likes to claim that "creationists" are biased, as Hunter points out, they don't take into account their own bias and how it affects their work and science in general...
Like the creationist who mandates a particular interpretation of scripture and interprets scientific evidence accordingly, the evolutionist also mandates a particular interpretation of the scientific evidence. All explanations must be thoroughly and completely naturalistic, no matter how contorted those explanations become.