...that the I.D.iots always frame the discussion in terms of "Intelligent Design" versus "Evolution," not "Intelligent Design" versus "Natural Selection?"
Would that be because evolution is a little bit mysterious and difficult to actually envision, while "Natural Selection," which is really what Darwin was espousing (the idea of evolution had been kicked around forever—no one had really nailed down the actual mechanism before) is plain to see everywhere in the world around us?
Why do rational people keep letting the yahoos and hicks set the terms? Take back the argument, folks, turn the tables—the real argument is between natural selection and "...pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!"
And for goodness sakes—why are we even dignifying their position by arguing it? Let them dry up and blow away.