Don Frack criticizes me at length for being what he calls a "creationist."
But my beliefs and affiliations -- whatever they may be -- are no more
relevant than Frack's beliefs and affiliations -- whatever they may be --
to the facts about peppered moths. "
But they are when you raised why this would be an issue for creationism.
See http://www.infidels.org/secular_web/feature/1999/wedge.html for information about "The wedge".
describes very clearly the path laid out by the Discovery institute to give some scientific credibility to intelligent design. The plan by itself shows the lack of scientific foundation of the institute's approach. But the plan also shows the relevance of the affiliation to the argument of the peppered moth. It is seen as a wedge that can be used to attack evolution. Of course as others have pointed out evolution does not depend on the peppered moth but it might be used to attack its credibility among those less familiar with science and more familiar with popular beliefs. And that is exactly the audience of "scientific" creationists that the plan is appealing to. Your responses make far more sense when seen in the light of this plan.
At least imho.