The way the historical sciences proceed today-assuming a naturalistic mechanism for every event in the past, dreaming up stories based on that assumption and then issuing papers and press conferences full of weasel words ("this is how it may have happened")-is so obviously unscientific that the historical sciences have a bad reputation among their more rigorous colleagues in the harder sciences. Under the ID paradigm, assumptions need to be stated and defended upfront, so even if we usually can't say how some historical event happened for sure, we are better aware of where the story might go wrong. (Darwin’s Nemesis p. 161)

David Keller has a Ph.D. in Philosophy from the University of Georgia and an M.A. in Philosophy from Boston College.