BobNOMAAMRooney%20nli said

[orig][quote]

The reason why "intelligent design" doesn't get any credibility as a science is because it CANNOT BE OBSERVED. Wrap it up in all the scientific language you want; it doesn't change the fact that researchers persuing it are trying to prove that a creator being is responsible for everything in the universe.

Not that life adapts to the environment around it and by looking at fossils and remains of precursors to life today's we can see such changes. Or that the stars magnitude and relative distance from Earth might just indicate how old our universe is. Or going back to first grade let's see how ID falls into the Scientific Method

-Ask a Question
Okay, you're doing that
-Do Background Research
Yep, you're doing that
-Construct a Hypothesis
"A wizard did it", a little strange but let's see where you're taking this.
-Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment
Are you there God? It's me...SCIENCE
-Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
DNA is complex so someone had to have made it
-Communicate Your Results
DAMN YOU DARWINIST ESTABLISHMENT FOR SILENCING MY FAULTY SCIENCE!

ID takes feasable avenues for research and tacks on a whole relgious agenda to affirm some asshole's shaky understanding of faith, earning it a well deserved Check Minus