http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design_movement lets treat any blatant hypocritical ID mail, post, thread, site, attack etc as spam, hoax etc, and counterspam these shitheads full on, drown them in their puke! see notably: "Intelligent design on the Web Much of the actual debate over intelligent design between intelligent design proponents and members of the scientific community has taken place on the Web, primarily blogs and message boards, instead of the scientific journals and symposiums where traditionally much science is discussed and settled. In promoting intelligent design the actions of its' proponents have been more like a political pressure group than like researchers entering an academic debate as described by movement critic Taner Edis. Websites such as Pandas Thumb , Dembski's blogs at UncommonDescent.com  and DesignInference.com  and the Discovery Institute's Evolutionnews.org  are the most common venues of intelligent design debate, often with discussions and their various responses taking place on two or more sites at a time. The Web again played an instrumental role in the controversy surrounding intelligent design when the Discovery Institute's strategic memo, the "Wedge Document" was leaked onto the Web in 1999. A broad attack on the foundations of the scientific method, what it terms "scientiﬁc materialism," the Wedge Document asserts that many of the moral woes in the world are the result of modern science, which has had "devastating" cultural consequences, such as the denial of objective moral standards and the undermining of religious belief. In contrast, the Wedge Document states that intelligent design "promises to reverse the stiﬂing dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions." In order to achieve this objective, the intelligent design movement will "function as a 'wedge'" that will "split the trunk [of scientiﬁc materialism] ... at its weakest points." The leaking of the Wedge Document put intelligent design proponents in an uncomfortable position by laying bare their strategy. At first the Discovery Institute disavowed the Wedge Document, then downplayed its importance, and finally acknowledged its origin with the institute and role. All of this was played out on the Web against the backdrop of debates over public school textbook disclaimers, Teach the Controversy initiatives and the Dover trial. Discovery Institute representatives continue to balk at being judged on religious grounds and accuse those who probe their motivations of engaging in ad hominem attacks. Critics claim that given the express language of the Wedge Document, the Discoveryâs ultimate agenda has far more to do with the renewal of religiously based culture by the overthrow of key tenets of modern science than with the disinterested pursuit of knowledge and that it is hard to see why they shouldn't take them at their own word. The Web continues to play a central role in the Discovery Institute's strategy of promotion of intelligent design and it adjunct campaigns. On September 6, 2006, on the center's evolutionnews.org blog Discovery Institute staffer Casey Luskin published a post entitled "Putting Wikipedia On Notice About Their Biased Anti-ID Intelligent Design Entries." There Luskin reprinted a letter from a reader complaining that he believed Wikipedia's coverage of ID to be "one sided" and that pro-intelligent design editors were censored and attacked. Along with the letter Luskin published a Wikipedia email address for general information and urged readers to "to contact Wikipedia to express your feelings about the biased nature of the entries on intelligent design."