I am thinking about your statements, and I have a few ideas about them.  But excuse me for a moment, first.  I have to take my shirt off.  I can't believe I decided to wear a linen shirt today.  The shirt is literally soaked with moisture and sweat.  I remember something about Central Americans.  They can wear a nice, crisp white shirt, follow you through the steamiest jungle.  End of the day, it's like it's just off the press.

From your statements, Pastor, it is clear that you have arrived at your conclusion before considering the evidence.  You talk about ultimate authority, and arriving at the truth.  In the discipline of science, there is neither an ultimate authority, or ultimate truth.  Scientists, and those who follow science, leave such phrases for their personal philosophies and religions.  Your statements, then, are definitively unfit for science.  So, why then, is it okay for you to promote intelligent design; something that attacks science from a position which it claims is scientific?  What makes a pastor more qualified than the scientific community to understand complex scientific issues?

Perhaps now is a good time to further define the political tool you are supporting.  Intelligent design is the latest chameleon-shape of science creationism.  Science creationism is the conjecture that states there is scientific evidence that supports the book of Genesis as being literally true.  Religious social conservatives have sought to undermine the theory of evolution through science creationism in the public sphere.  In our country, the courts have served irrecoverable blows to straight-forward creationism by unmasking its veil. 

In an effort to cloak science creationism as something different, something untouchable by the courts, religious social conservatives learned to dress creationism up in a lab coat, by removing words like God.