In summary, if a highly improbable pattern of events or object exhibits purpose, structure or function and can not be reasonably and rationally explained by the operation of the laws of physics and chemistry or some other regularity or law, then it is reasonable to infer that the pattern was designed. — the product of a mind.
That, in a nutshell, is ID. It offers no predictions, scope modifiers, or experimental methods of its own. It's a default answer, a shrug, consisting entirely of problems in Darwinism. Those problems should be taught in school, but there's no reason to call them intelligent design. Intelligent design, as defined by its advocates, means nothing.
If you are doing due diligence on the Theory of Evolution, you may cite ID as footnote in the chapter on Risk Factors.
Perhaps in a Philosophy course (where this subject really belongs) you could devote several paragraphs in its discussion.
ID more appropriately belongs in George W Bush's Presidential platform.
This is what you voted for. You bed your bed. Now sleep in it. |
