Promoters of Intelligent Design (ID) often claim to be agnostic about the identity of the designer. Indeed, some ID promoters have suggested that the designer could be a space alien or a time-traveler from the future. To me, it seems rather pointless to argue about the religious nature of ID.
The most important distingushing trait of ID is that it is NOT science. The reason religion always comes up is because some people are actively trying to push the non-science of ID into science classrooms, and their motivations for doing so are therefore suspect.
The non-scientific nature of ID is easily demonstrated by looking at the evidence:
>>There are no peer-reviewed publications that provide positive evidence for ID.All purportedly scientific ideas are ultimately judged by their ability to advance scientific inquiry. ID has utterly failed in this regard.
>>There have been no experiments performed using ID "theory" as a framework for forming testable hypotheses.
>>Prominent leaders of the ID movement have openly admitted that there is no "theory" of ID.
So what if ID is not religious? The indisputable fact is that it is NOT science, and that's why it deserves no place in public school science curricula.
posted by Jeremy Mohn
