智能设计 (Chinese Wikipedia)

Numbers, Ronald L. The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design Expanded ed., 1st Harvard University Press pbk. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 2006: 373 [Originally published 1992 as The Creationists: The Evolution of Scientific Creationism; New York: Alfred A. Knopf]. ISBN 0-674-02339-0. LCCN 2006043675. OCLC 69734583. [ID] captured headlines for its bold attempt to rewrite the basic rules of science and its claim to have found indisputable evidence of a God-like being. Proponents, however, insisted it was 'not a religious-based idea, but instead an evidence-based scientific theory about life's origins – one that challenges strictly materialistic views of evolution.' Although the intellectual roots of the design argument go back centuries, its contemporary incarnation dates from the 1980s".

archive.today (Global: 28^th place; Chinese: 9^th place)

Dembski. 2005. Intelligent Design's Contribution to the Debate Over Evolution: A Reply to Henry Morris.Reply to Henry Morris Archive.today的存檔，存档日期2012-07-29

arn.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

Phillip Johnson. Touchstone: A Journal of Mere Christianity. July/August 1999."...the first thing that has to be done is to get the Bible out of the discussion. ...This is not to say that the biblical issues are unimportant; the point is rather that the time to address them will be after we have separated materialist prejudice from scientific fact." The Wedge （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
Phillip Johnson. "My colleagues and I speak of 'theistic realism'-- or sometimes, 'mere creation' -- as the defining concept of our [the ID] movement. This means that we affirm that God is objectively real as Creator, and that the reality of God is tangibly recorded in evidence accessible to science, particularly in biology." Starting a Conversation about Evolution （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）

au.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

Intelligent Design: Creationism’s Trojan Horse, A Conversation With Barbara Forrest （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） Americans United for Separation of Church and State, February 2005

canada.com (Global: 1,459^th place; Chinese: 1,881^st place)

Meyer, Stephen C. Not by chance. National Post (Don Mills, Ontario: CanWest MediaWorks Publications Inc.). December 1, 2005 [2014-02-28]. （原始内容存档于2006-05-01）.

christianity.ca (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

菲力普·约翰遜：“我們的策略一直是，在學術界和學校内，將智能設計的標題——實質上就是上帝的真實性，做一些改變。”约翰遜2004. Christianity.ca. Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2007-06-08.。“不真的是科學争議，也許也不會成為科學争議。這是關于宗教和哲學。”约翰遜1996. World Magazine. Witnesses For The Prosecution （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. “問題是：如何贏得勝利？這就是我開始建立的你們現在看到的鍥入策略：抓住最主要的問題——生命機制和信息系統的建立。把聖經和創世紀從辯論中剔除，因為大家不想見到所謂‘聖經科學’。這様組織語言進行争論，才能讓你的聲音被世俗的科學界聽見，并且團結宗教反對派。這意味着集中在一個話題：你是否需要一個創造者來創造世界，或者大自然能夠自行其是？而避免被其他問題岔開。”约翰遜2000. Touchstone magazine. Berkeley's Radical An Interview with Phillip E. Johnson 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2007-06-09.
Phillip E. Johnson. American Family Radio. January 10, 2003 "Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of Intelligent Design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools." Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2007-06-08.

citizenlink.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). Context, pp. 25–26 （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. " ID’s 'official position' does not acknowledge that the designer is God", "...[T]he writings of leading ID proponents reveal that the designer postulated by their argument is the God of Christianity." Context, p. 35 （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. "defense experts Professors Behe and Minnich testified that ID is not creationism".
- Williams, Devon. Friday Five: William A. Dembski. CitizenLink.com. Colorado Springs, CO: Focus on the Family Action, Inc. December 14, 2007 [2014-02-28]. （原始内容存档于2007-12-17）. I believe God created the world for a purpose. The Designer of intelligent design is, ultimately, the Christian God.

coralridge.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

"I have built an intellectual movement in the universities and churches that we call The Wedge, which is devoted to scholarship and writing that furthers this program of questioning the materialistic basis of science."..."Now the way that I see the logic of our movement going is like this. The first thing you understand is that the Darwinian theory isn't true. It's falsified by all of the evidence and the logic is terrible. When you realize that, the next question that occurs to you is, well, where might you get the truth?"..."I start with John 1:1. In the beginning was the word. In the beginning was intelligence, purpose, and wisdom. The Bible had that right. And the materialist scientists are deluding themselves." Johnson 1999. Reclaiming America for Christ Conference. How the Evolution Debate Can Be Won 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2007-11-07.

creighton.edu (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

puffin.creighton.edu

Dembski. What is the position of the NRCSE on the teaching of intelligent design [ID] as an alternative to neo-Darwinian evolution in Nebraska schools? （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）

csic.es (Global: 2,036^th place; Chinese: 5,677^th place)

ebd10.ebd.csic.es

Jon Buell & Virginia Hearn (eds), 1992. Proceedings of a Symposium entitled: Darwinism: Scientific Inference of Philosophical Preference? （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）"

ctlibrary.com (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

Meyer, Stephen C.; Nelson, Paul A. Getting Rid of the Unfair Rules. Origins & Design (Book review) (Colorado Springs, CO: Access Research Network). May 1, 1996 [2007-05-20]. （原始内容存档于2009-10-07）.
- Johnson, Phillip E. Third-Party Science. Books & Culture (Book review). May–June 1996, 2 (3) [2012-06-16]. （原始内容存档于2014-02-19）.

designinference.com (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

Dembski. 2005. Intelligent Design's Contribution to the Debate Over Evolution: A Reply to Henry Morris.Reply to Henry Morris Archive.today的存檔，存档日期2012-07-29

discovery.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

CSC - Top Questions: Questions About Intelligent Design: What is the theory of intelligent design?. Center for Science and Culture. Seattle, WA: Discovery Institute. [2012-06-16]. （原始内容存档于2016-03-03）.
- Intelligent Design Theory in a Nutshell (PDF). Seattle, WA: Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center. 2004 [2012-06-16]. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2012-05-03）.
- Meyer, Stephen C.; Nelson, Paul A. Getting Rid of the Unfair Rules. Origins & Design (Book review) (Colorado Springs, CO: Access Research Network). May 1, 1996 [2007-05-20]. （原始内容存档于2009-10-07）.
  - Johnson, Phillip E. Third-Party Science. Books & Culture (Book review). May–June 1996, 2 (3) [2012-06-16]. （原始内容存档于2014-02-19）.
  - The Wedge Document （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）（PDF file）, a 1999 Discovery Institute fundraising pamphlet. Cited in Handley P. Evolution or design debate heats up. （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） The Times of Oman, 7 March 2005.
  - Discovery Institute fellows and staff. [1] （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） Center for Science and Culture fellows and staff. 存档副本. [2014-02-28]. （原始内容存档于2004-07-14）.
  - 引述菲力普·约翰遜2001年講話。Teresa Watanabe. Los Angeles Times (Sunday Front page) 2001年3月25日。“我們所説的是科學界和學術界大多數人都有的直覺，”試圖用一個傾向上帝的可選擇理論來替代達爾文主義，長老會教徒约翰遜教授説，“我們將消除接受上帝為創造者的文化障礙。”Enlisting Science to Find the Fingerprints of a Creator: Believers in 'intelligent design' try to redirect evolution disputes along intellectual lines （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）

doi.org (Global: 2^nd place; Chinese: 5^th place)

Boudry, Maarten; Blancke, Stefaan; Braeckman, Johan. Irreducible Incoherence and Intelligent Design: A Look into the Conceptual Toolbox of a Pseudoscience (PDF). The Quarterly Review of Biology (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press). December 2010, 85 (4): 473–482 [2017-11-11]. PMID 21243965. doi:10.1086/656904. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2017-08-09）. Article available from Universiteit Gent （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
An intelligently designed response. Nature Methods (Editorial) (London: Nature Publishing Group). December 2007, 4 (12): 983 [2014-02-28]. ISSN 1548-7091. doi:10.1038/nmeth1207-983. （原始内容存档于2014-03-09）.

en.wikisource.org (Global: 82^nd place; Chinese: 964^th place)

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). Context, pp. 25–26 （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. " ID’s 'official position' does not acknowledge that the designer is God", "...[T]he writings of leading ID proponents reveal that the designer postulated by their argument is the God of Christianity." Context, p. 35 （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. "defense experts Professors Behe and Minnich testified that ID is not creationism".
- Williams, Devon. Friday Five: William A. Dembski. CitizenLink.com. Colorado Springs, CO: Focus on the Family Action, Inc. December 14, 2007 [2014-02-28]. （原始内容存档于2007-12-17）. I believe God created the world for a purpose. The Designer of intelligent design is, ultimately, the Christian God.

fandm.edu (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

server1.fandm.edu

Michael J. Murray, n.d. Natural Providence (or Design Trouble) 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2006-08-20.（PDF）

ideacenter.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

CSC - Top Questions: Questions About Intelligent Design: What is the theory of intelligent design?. Center for Science and Culture. Seattle, WA: Discovery Institute. [2012-06-16]. （原始内容存档于2016-03-03）.
- Intelligent Design Theory in a Nutshell (PDF). Seattle, WA: Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center. 2004 [2012-06-16]. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2012-05-03）.

infidels.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

Barbara Forrest. 2001. "The Wedge at Work: Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
Barbara Forrest, 2000. "Methodological Naturalism and Philosophical Naturalism: Clarifying the Connection （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）." In Philo, Vol. 3, No. 2（Fall-Winter 2000）, pp. 7-29.

interacademies.net (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

IAP Statement on the Teaching of Evolution 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2007-09-27. Joint statement issued by the national science academies of 67 countries, including the United Kingdom's Royal Society（PDF file）

iscast.org.au (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

"While the ID crowd have some things of interest to say they, are indeed just a revamped God of the gaps and the Paylean argument from design in a more modern form. Their refusal to engage with the theological issues this engenders is their greatest weakness, it is also a deliberate strategy, to try and show to the secular world they are nothing but scientists and philosophers. It also hides from their Christian constituency that some of their people are not Christian - at least one is a Moonie. Their second weakness is to muddy the waters with terms like "methodological naturalism", "operations science" and "origins science". The fact that some leading Christian philosophers in the US（i.e. Plantiga）are also confused does not help. Their third weakness is that they are their refusal to come clean on the age of the earth. This is to try and hide the fact that they have strong links with the young earthers, at least one of their leading people is a strong young earther. Fourthly, the movement is strongly driven by a US political agenda - the "renewal" of US society and culture through the destruction of materialism via it's supposed foundation of "methodological naturalism", the greatest strength of which is supposedto be evolution. The export of this US agenda, redolent with the culture wars, to the rest of the world, is of grave concern." Intelligent Design? 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2006-08-21. ISCAST Bullentin, Issue 48, Spring 2005. Institute for the Study of Christianity in an Age of Science and Technology.（PDF file）

jstor.org (Global: 23^rd place; Chinese: 69^th place)

Young, Matt; Edis, Taner (编). Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. 2004: 195–196. ISBN 0-8135-3433-X. JSTOR 40072957. LCCN 2003020100. OCLC 59717533.

leaderu.com (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

菲力普·约翰遜：“我們的策略一直是，在學術界和學校内，將智能設計的標題——實質上就是上帝的真實性，做一些改變。”约翰遜2004. Christianity.ca. Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2007-06-08.。“不真的是科學争議，也許也不會成為科學争議。這是關于宗教和哲學。”约翰遜1996. World Magazine. Witnesses For The Prosecution （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. “問題是：如何贏得勝利？這就是我開始建立的你們現在看到的鍥入策略：抓住最主要的問題——生命機制和信息系統的建立。把聖經和創世紀從辯論中剔除，因為大家不想見到所謂‘聖經科學’。這様組織語言進行争論，才能讓你的聲音被世俗的科學界聽見，并且團結宗教反對派。這意味着集中在一個話題：你是否需要一個創造者來創造世界，或者大自然能夠自行其是？而避免被其他問題岔開。”约翰遜2000. Touchstone magazine. Berkeley's Radical An Interview with Phillip E. Johnson 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2007-06-09.
Joel Belz, 1996. World Magazine. Witnesses For The Prosecution （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）

loc.gov (Global: 63^rd place; Chinese: 264^th place)

lccn.loc.gov

Numbers, Ronald L. The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design Expanded ed., 1st Harvard University Press pbk. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 2006: 373 [Originally published 1992 as The Creationists: The Evolution of Scientific Creationism; New York: Alfred A. Knopf]. ISBN 0-674-02339-0. LCCN 2006043675. OCLC 69734583. [ID] captured headlines for its bold attempt to rewrite the basic rules of science and its claim to have found indisputable evidence of a God-like being. Proponents, however, insisted it was 'not a religious-based idea, but instead an evidence-based scientific theory about life's origins – one that challenges strictly materialistic views of evolution.' Although the intellectual roots of the design argument go back centuries, its contemporary incarnation dates from the 1980s".
Pigliucci, Massimo. Science in the Courtroom: The Case against Intelligent Design (PDF). Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 2010: 160–186 [2017-11-11]. ISBN 978-0-226-66786-7. LCCN 2009049778. OCLC 457149439. （原始内容 (PDF)存档于2017-06-29）.
Young, Matt; Edis, Taner (编). Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. 2004: 195–196. ISBN 0-8135-3433-X. JSTOR 40072957. LCCN 2003020100. OCLC 59717533.

nabt.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

National Association of Biology Teachers Statement on Teaching Evolution 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2006-09-27.

nature.com (Global: 207^th place; Chinese: 205^th place)

An intelligently designed response. Nature Methods (Editorial) (London: Nature Publishing Group). December 2007, 4 (12): 983 [2014-02-28]. ISSN 1548-7091. doi:10.1038/nmeth1207-983. （原始内容存档于2014-03-09）.

ncse.com (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

Pigliucci, Massimo. Science in the Courtroom: The Case against Intelligent Design (PDF). Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 2010: 160–186 [2017-11-11]. ISBN 978-0-226-66786-7. LCCN 2009049778. OCLC 457149439. （原始内容 (PDF)存档于2017-06-29）.

nih.gov (Global: 5^th place; Chinese: 3^rd place)

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Boudry, Maarten; Blancke, Stefaan; Braeckman, Johan. Irreducible Incoherence and Intelligent Design: A Look into the Conceptual Toolbox of a Pseudoscience (PDF). The Quarterly Review of Biology (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press). December 2010, 85 (4): 473–482 [2017-11-11]. PMID 21243965. doi:10.1086/656904. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2017-08-09）. Article available from Universiteit Gent （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）

nwsource.com (Global: 1,828^th place; Chinese: 1,474^th place)

seattletimes.nwsource.com

Seattle Times. March 31, 2005.Does Seattle group "teach controversy" or contribute to it? （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）

smh.com.au (Global: 154^th place; Chinese: 379^th place)

Coultan, Mark. Intelligent design a Trojan horse, says creationist. 雪梨晨鋒報. 2005-11-27 [2009-02-19]. （原始内容存档于2018-05-29）.

stnews.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

Karl Giberson. Science & Theology News, December 5, 2005 Intelligent design’s long march to nowhere 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2015-09-19.

talkorigins.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Trial transcript: Day 6 (October 5), PM Session, Part 1. TalkOrigins Archive. Houston, TX: The TalkOrigins Foundation, Inc. [2012-06-16]. （原始内容存档于2016-05-16）. Q. Has the Discovery Institute been a leader in the intelligent design movement? A. Yes, the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. Q. And are almost all of the individuals who are involved with the intelligent design movement associated with the Discovery Institute? A. All of the leaders are, yes.

thedailybeast.com (Global: 517^th place; Chinese: 902^nd place)

Giberson, Karl W. My Debate With an 'Intelligent Design' Theorist. The Daily Beast (New York: The Newsweek Daily Beast Company). April 21, 2014 [2014-05-14]. （原始内容存档于2014-05-14）.

time.com (Global: 84^th place; Chinese: 128^th place)

Claudia Wallis. Time Magazine, August 15, 2005. page 32 Evolution Wars （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）

touchstonemag.com (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

菲力普·约翰遜：“我們的策略一直是，在學術界和學校内，將智能設計的標題——實質上就是上帝的真實性，做一些改變。”约翰遜2004. Christianity.ca. Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2007-06-08.。“不真的是科學争議，也許也不會成為科學争議。這是關于宗教和哲學。”约翰遜1996. World Magazine. Witnesses For The Prosecution （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. “問題是：如何贏得勝利？這就是我開始建立的你們現在看到的鍥入策略：抓住最主要的問題——生命機制和信息系統的建立。把聖經和創世紀從辯論中剔除，因為大家不想見到所謂‘聖經科學’。這様組織語言進行争論，才能讓你的聲音被世俗的科學界聽見，并且團結宗教反對派。這意味着集中在一個話題：你是否需要一個創造者來創造世界，或者大自然能夠自行其是？而避免被其他問題岔開。”约翰遜2000. Touchstone magazine. Berkeley's Radical An Interview with Phillip E. Johnson 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2007-06-09.
Dembski. "Intelligent design is just the Logos theology of John's Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory," Touchstone Magazine. Volume 12, Issue 4 July/August, 1999 （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）

ugent.be (Global: 3,681^st place; Chinese: 6,002^nd place)

biblio.ugent.be

Boudry, Maarten; Blancke, Stefaan; Braeckman, Johan. Irreducible Incoherence and Intelligent Design: A Look into the Conceptual Toolbox of a Pseudoscience (PDF). The Quarterly Review of Biology (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press). December 2010, 85 (4): 473–482 [2017-11-11]. PMID 21243965. doi:10.1086/656904. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2017-08-09）. Article available from Universiteit Gent （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）

upload.wikimedia.org (Global: 1,245^th place; Chinese: 803^rd place)

The Wedge Document （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）（PDF file）, a 1999 Discovery Institute fundraising pamphlet. Cited in Handley P. Evolution or design debate heats up. （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） The Times of Oman, 7 March 2005.
The Wedge Strategy （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） Discovery Institute, Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture. 1998 (PDF file)

web.archive.org (Global: 1^st place; Chinese: 1^st place)

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Trial transcript: Day 6 (October 5), PM Session, Part 1. TalkOrigins Archive. Houston, TX: The TalkOrigins Foundation, Inc. [2012-06-16]. （原始内容存档于2016-05-16）. Q. Has the Discovery Institute been a leader in the intelligent design movement? A. Yes, the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. Q. And are almost all of the individuals who are involved with the intelligent design movement associated with the Discovery Institute? A. All of the leaders are, yes.
Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). Context, pp. 25–26 （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. " ID’s 'official position' does not acknowledge that the designer is God", "...[T]he writings of leading ID proponents reveal that the designer postulated by their argument is the God of Christianity." Context, p. 35 （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. "defense experts Professors Behe and Minnich testified that ID is not creationism".
- Williams, Devon. Friday Five: William A. Dembski. CitizenLink.com. Colorado Springs, CO: Focus on the Family Action, Inc. December 14, 2007 [2014-02-28]. （原始内容存档于2007-12-17）. I believe God created the world for a purpose. The Designer of intelligent design is, ultimately, the Christian God.
- Meyer, Stephen C. Not by chance. National Post (Don Mills, Ontario: CanWest MediaWorks Publications Inc.). December 1, 2005 [2014-02-28]. （原始内容存档于2006-05-01）.
- Boudry, Maarten; Blancke, Stefaan; Braeckman, Johan. Irreducible Incoherence and Intelligent Design: A Look into the Conceptual Toolbox of a Pseudoscience (PDF). The Quarterly Review of Biology (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press). December 2010, 85 (4): 473–482 [2017-11-11]. PMID 21243965. doi:10.1086/656904. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2017-08-09）. Article available from Universiteit Gent （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
- Pigliucci, Massimo. Science in the Courtroom: The Case against Intelligent Design (PDF). Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 2010: 160–186 [2017-11-11]. ISBN 978-0-226-66786-7. LCCN 2009049778. OCLC 457149439. （原始内容 (PDF)存档于2017-06-29）.
- CSC - Top Questions: Questions About Intelligent Design: What is the theory of intelligent design?. Center for Science and Culture. Seattle, WA: Discovery Institute. [2012-06-16]. （原始内容存档于2016-03-03）.
  - Intelligent Design Theory in a Nutshell (PDF). Seattle, WA: Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center. 2004 [2012-06-16]. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2012-05-03）.
  - An intelligently designed response. Nature Methods (Editorial) (London: Nature Publishing Group). December 2007, 4 (12): 983 [2014-02-28]. ISSN 1548-7091. doi:10.1038/nmeth1207-983. （原始内容存档于2014-03-09）.
  - Meyer, Stephen C.; Nelson, Paul A. Getting Rid of the Unfair Rules. Origins & Design (Book review) (Colorado Springs, CO: Access Research Network). May 1, 1996 [2007-05-20]. （原始内容存档于2009-10-07）.
    - Johnson, Phillip E. Third-Party Science. Books & Culture (Book review). May–June 1996, 2 (3) [2012-06-16]. （原始内容存档于2014-02-19）.
    - Giberson, Karl W. My Debate With an 'Intelligent Design' Theorist. The Daily Beast (New York: The Newsweek Daily Beast Company). April 21, 2014 [2014-05-14]. （原始内容存档于2014-05-14）.
    - The Wedge Document （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）（PDF file）, a 1999 Discovery Institute fundraising pamphlet. Cited in Handley P. Evolution or design debate heats up. （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） The Times of Oman, 7 March 2005.
    - 菲力普·约翰遜：“我們的策略一直是，在學術界和學校内，將智能設計的標題——實質上就是上帝的真實性，做一些改變。”约翰遜2004. Christianity.ca. Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2007-06-08.。“不真的是科學争議，也許也不會成為科學争議。這是關于宗教和哲學。”约翰遜1996. World Magazine. Witnesses For The Prosecution （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. “問題是：如何贏得勝利？這就是我開始建立的你們現在看到的鍥入策略：抓住最主要的問題——生命機制和信息系統的建立。把聖經和創世紀從辯論中剔除，因為大家不想見到所謂‘聖經科學’。這様組織語言進行争論，才能讓你的聲音被世俗的科學界聽見，并且團結宗教反對派。這意味着集中在一個話題：你是否需要一個創造者來創造世界，或者大自然能夠自行其是？而避免被其他問題岔開。”约翰遜2000. Touchstone magazine. Berkeley's Radical An Interview with Phillip E. Johnson 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2007-06-09.
    - "I have built an intellectual movement in the universities and churches that we call The Wedge, which is devoted to scholarship and writing that furthers this program of questioning the materialistic basis of science."..."Now the way that I see the logic of our movement going is like this. The first thing you understand is that the Darwinian theory isn't true. It's falsified by all of the evidence and the logic is terrible. When you realize that, the next question that occurs to you is, well, where might you get the truth?"..."I start with John 1:1. In the beginning was the word. In the beginning was intelligence, purpose, and wisdom. The Bible had that right. And the materialist scientists are deluding themselves." Johnson 1999. Reclaiming America for Christ Conference. How the Evolution Debate Can Be Won 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2007-11-07.
    - Discovery Institute fellows and staff. [1] （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） Center for Science and Culture fellows and staff. 存档副本. [2014-02-28]. （原始内容存档于2004-07-14）.
    - The Wedge Strategy （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） Discovery Institute, Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture. 1998 (PDF file)
    - Barbara Forrest. 2001. "The Wedge at Work: Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
    - Phillip Johnson. Touchstone: A Journal of Mere Christianity. July/August 1999."...the first thing that has to be done is to get the Bible out of the discussion. ...This is not to say that the biblical issues are unimportant; the point is rather that the time to address them will be after we have separated materialist prejudice from scientific fact." The Wedge （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
    - Dembski. "Intelligent design is just the Logos theology of John's Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory," Touchstone Magazine. Volume 12, Issue 4 July/August, 1999 （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
    - Seattle Times. March 31, 2005.Does Seattle group "teach controversy" or contribute to it? （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
    - National Association of Biology Teachers Statement on Teaching Evolution 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2006-09-27.
    - IAP Statement on the Teaching of Evolution 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2007-09-27. Joint statement issued by the national science academies of 67 countries, including the United Kingdom's Royal Society（PDF file）
    - 美國科學促進會：2006 Statement on the Teaching of Evolution （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）（PDF file）, AAAS Denounces Anti-Evolution Laws （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
    - Coultan, Mark. Intelligent design a Trojan horse, says creationist. 雪梨晨鋒報. 2005-11-27 [2009-02-19]. （原始内容存档于2018-05-29）.
    - Intelligent Design: Creationism’s Trojan Horse, A Conversation With Barbara Forrest （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） Americans United for Separation of Church and State, February 2005
    - Barbara Forrest, 2000. "Methodological Naturalism and Philosophical Naturalism: Clarifying the Connection （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）." In Philo, Vol. 3, No. 2（Fall-Winter 2000）, pp. 7-29.
    - Phillip Johnson. "My colleagues and I speak of 'theistic realism'-- or sometimes, 'mere creation' -- as the defining concept of our [the ID] movement. This means that we affirm that God is objectively real as Creator, and that the reality of God is tangibly recorded in evidence accessible to science, particularly in biology." Starting a Conversation about Evolution （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
    - 引述菲力普·约翰遜2001年講話。Teresa Watanabe. Los Angeles Times (Sunday Front page) 2001年3月25日。“我們所説的是科學界和學術界大多數人都有的直覺，”試圖用一個傾向上帝的可選擇理論來替代達爾文主義，長老會教徒约翰遜教授説，“我們將消除接受上帝為創造者的文化障礙。”Enlisting Science to Find the Fingerprints of a Creator: Believers in 'intelligent design' try to redirect evolution disputes along intellectual lines （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
    - Joel Belz, 1996. World Magazine. Witnesses For The Prosecution （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
    - Phillip E. Johnson. American Family Radio. January 10, 2003 "Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of Intelligent Design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools." Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2007-06-08.
    - Jon Buell & Virginia Hearn (eds), 1992. Proceedings of a Symposium entitled: Darwinism: Scientific Inference of Philosophical Preference? （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）"
    - Karl Giberson. Science & Theology News, December 5, 2005 Intelligent design’s long march to nowhere 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2015-09-19.
    - Claudia Wallis. Time Magazine, August 15, 2005. page 32 Evolution Wars （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
    - Michael J. Murray, n.d. Natural Providence (or Design Trouble) 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2006-08-20.（PDF）
    - Dembski. What is the position of the NRCSE on the teaching of intelligent design [ID] as an alternative to neo-Darwinian evolution in Nebraska schools? （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
    - "While the ID crowd have some things of interest to say they, are indeed just a revamped God of the gaps and the Paylean argument from design in a more modern form. Their refusal to engage with the theological issues this engenders is their greatest weakness, it is also a deliberate strategy, to try and show to the secular world they are nothing but scientists and philosophers. It also hides from their Christian constituency that some of their people are not Christian - at least one is a Moonie. Their second weakness is to muddy the waters with terms like "methodological naturalism", "operations science" and "origins science". The fact that some leading Christian philosophers in the US（i.e. Plantiga）are also confused does not help. Their third weakness is that they are their refusal to come clean on the age of the earth. This is to try and hide the fact that they have strong links with the young earthers, at least one of their leading people is a strong young earther. Fourthly, the movement is strongly driven by a US political agenda - the "renewal" of US society and culture through the destruction of materialism via it's supposed foundation of "methodological naturalism", the greatest strength of which is supposedto be evolution. The export of this US agenda, redolent with the culture wars, to the rest of the world, is of grave concern." Intelligent Design? 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期2006-08-21. ISCAST Bullentin, Issue 48, Spring 2005. Institute for the Study of Christianity in an Age of Science and Technology.（PDF file）

worldcat.org (Global: 4^th place; Chinese: 4^th place)

Numbers, Ronald L. The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design Expanded ed., 1st Harvard University Press pbk. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 2006: 373 [Originally published 1992 as The Creationists: The Evolution of Scientific Creationism; New York: Alfred A. Knopf]. ISBN 0-674-02339-0. LCCN 2006043675. OCLC 69734583. [ID] captured headlines for its bold attempt to rewrite the basic rules of science and its claim to have found indisputable evidence of a God-like being. Proponents, however, insisted it was 'not a religious-based idea, but instead an evidence-based scientific theory about life's origins – one that challenges strictly materialistic views of evolution.' Although the intellectual roots of the design argument go back centuries, its contemporary incarnation dates from the 1980s".
Pigliucci, Massimo. Science in the Courtroom: The Case against Intelligent Design (PDF). Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 2010: 160–186 [2017-11-11]. ISBN 978-0-226-66786-7. LCCN 2009049778. OCLC 457149439. （原始内容 (PDF)存档于2017-06-29）.
Young, Matt; Edis, Taner (编). Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. 2004: 195–196. ISBN 0-8135-3433-X. JSTOR 40072957. LCCN 2003020100. OCLC 59717533.
An intelligently designed response. Nature Methods (Editorial) (London: Nature Publishing Group). December 2007, 4 (12): 983 [2014-02-28]. ISSN 1548-7091. doi:10.1038/nmeth1207-983. （原始内容存档于2014-03-09）.

zh.wikisource.org (Global: 410^th place; Chinese: 16^th place)

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). Context, pp. 24–25. "the argument for ID is not a new scientific argument, but is rather an old religious argument for the existence of God. He traced this argument back to at least Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century, who framed the argument as a syllogism: Wherever complex design exists, there must have been a designer; nature is complex; therefore nature must have had an intelligent designer. ...
...[T]his argument for the existence of God was advanced early in the 19th century by Reverend Paley... [the teleological argument] The only apparent difference between the argument made by Paley and the argument for ID, as expressed by defense expert witnesses Behe and Minnich, is that ID's 'official position' does not acknowledge that the designer is God."

智能设计 (Chinese Wikipedia)

aaas.org (Global: 6,319th place; Chinese: 7,372nd place)

archive.org (Global: 6th place; Chinese: 2nd place)

archive.today (Global: 28th place; Chinese: 9th place)

arn.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

au.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

canada.com (Global: 1,459th place; Chinese: 1,881st place)

christianity.ca (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

citizenlink.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

coralridge.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

creighton.edu (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

puffin.creighton.edu

csic.es (Global: 2,036th place; Chinese: 5,677th place)

ebd10.ebd.csic.es

ctlibrary.com (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

designinference.com (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

discovery.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

doi.org (Global: 2nd place; Chinese: 5th place)

en.wikisource.org (Global: 82nd place; Chinese: 964th place)

fandm.edu (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

server1.fandm.edu

ideacenter.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

infidels.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

interacademies.net (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

iscast.org.au (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

jstor.org (Global: 23rd place; Chinese: 69th place)

leaderu.com (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

loc.gov (Global: 63rd place; Chinese: 264th place)

lccn.loc.gov

nabt.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

nature.com (Global: 207th place; Chinese: 205th place)

ncse.com (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

nih.gov (Global: 5th place; Chinese: 3rd place)

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

nwsource.com (Global: 1,828th place; Chinese: 1,474th place)

seattletimes.nwsource.com

smh.com.au (Global: 154th place; Chinese: 379th place)

stnews.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

talkorigins.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

thedailybeast.com (Global: 517th place; Chinese: 902nd place)

time.com (Global: 84th place; Chinese: 128th place)

touchstonemag.com (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

ugent.be (Global: 3,681st place; Chinese: 6,002nd place)

biblio.ugent.be

upload.wikimedia.org (Global: 1,245th place; Chinese: 803rd place)

web.archive.org (Global: 1st place; Chinese: 1st place)

worldcat.org (Global: 4th place; Chinese: 4th place)

zh.wikisource.org (Global: 410th place; Chinese: 16th place)

aaas.org (Global: 6,319^th place; Chinese: 7,372^nd place)

archive.org (Global: 6^th place; Chinese: 2^nd place)

archive.today (Global: 28^th place; Chinese: 9^th place)

canada.com (Global: 1,459^th place; Chinese: 1,881^st place)

csic.es (Global: 2,036^th place; Chinese: 5,677^th place)

doi.org (Global: 2^nd place; Chinese: 5^th place)

en.wikisource.org (Global: 82^nd place; Chinese: 964^th place)

jstor.org (Global: 23^rd place; Chinese: 69^th place)

loc.gov (Global: 63^rd place; Chinese: 264^th place)

nature.com (Global: 207^th place; Chinese: 205^th place)

nih.gov (Global: 5^th place; Chinese: 3^rd place)

nwsource.com (Global: 1,828^th place; Chinese: 1,474^th place)

smh.com.au (Global: 154^th place; Chinese: 379^th place)

thedailybeast.com (Global: 517^th place; Chinese: 902^nd place)

time.com (Global: 84^th place; Chinese: 128^th place)

ugent.be (Global: 3,681^st place; Chinese: 6,002^nd place)

upload.wikimedia.org (Global: 1,245^th place; Chinese: 803^rd place)

web.archive.org (Global: 1^st place; Chinese: 1^st place)

worldcat.org (Global: 4^th place; Chinese: 4^th place)

zh.wikisource.org (Global: 410^th place; Chinese: 16^th place)