This is Intelligent Design stated as a sentence: The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
In order for it to be scientific, it must be compatible with the scientific method. This is the scientific method:
So, to follow the scientific method, something must be able to be put into a hypothesis answering a question and be answerable, observable, testable, and falsifiable.
Intelligent Design fits all of this and is therefore scientific.
Intelligent Design can be put into a hypothesis (as put above) and is answerable (just whether certain features are best explained by an intelligent cause). It is observable, we observe intelligent agents manipulating matter for their purposes, which consistently contains high levels of CSI (complex-specified information). Intelligent design is testable, we can reverse engineer systems to determine CSI levels and makes predictions regarding these structures, which can be verified or falsified. Intelligent Design is falsifiable, its predictions can be falsified by scientific research and experimentation.
Since intelligent design follows the scientific method, it is therefore scientific.
One could flip the coin and ask if the opposite, random chance is scientific. We certainly don't do titrations with random chance - in fact, no scientific experiment is done using random chance. SO why say that intelligent design is not scientific? It is a point of reference for explaining how things came to be. If this is rational and follows the scientific method, then it surely is scientific.
Evidence for Design in Physics and Cosmology
The fine-tuning of the laws of physics and chemistry to allow for advanced life is an example of extremely high levels of CSI in nature. The laws of the universe are complex because they are highly unlikely. Cosmologists have calculated the odds of a life-friendly universe appearing by chance are less than one part in 1010^123. That’s ten raised to a power of 10 with 123 zeros after it! The laws of the universe are specified in that they match the narrow band of parameters required for the existence of advanced life. An atheist cosmologist Fred Hoyle observed, “a common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology.” The universe itself shows strong evidence of having been designed.
Bernd-Olaf Kuppers has pointed out in his book Information and the Origin of Life that “the problem of the origin of life is clearly basically equivalent to the problem of the origin of biological information.” As noted previously, intelligent design begins with the observation that intelligent agents generate large quantities of complex and specified information (CSI). Studies of the cell reveal vast quantities of biochemical information stored in our DNA in the sequence of nucleotides. No physical or chemical law dictates the order of the nucleotide bases in our DNA, and the sequences are highly improbable and complex. Moreover, the coding regions of DNA exhibit sequential arrangements of bases that are necessary to produce functional proteins. In other words, they are highly specified with respect to the independent requirements of protein function and protein synthesis. Thus, as nearly all molecular biologists now recognize, the coding regions of DNA possess a high “information content”—where “information content” in a biological context means precisely “complexity and specificity.” Even atheist zoologist Richard Dawkins concedes that “biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.” Atheists like Dawkins believe that unguided natural processes did all the “designing” but intelligent design theorist Stephen C. Meyer notes, “in all cases where we know the causal origin of ‘high information content,’ experience has shown that intelligent design played a causal role.”
Evidence for Design in the Development of Biological Complexity
The scientific method is commonly described as a four-step process involving observations, hypothesis, experiments, and conclusion. In this regard, ID uses the scientific method to claim that many features of life are designed—not just the information in DNA. After starting with the observation that intelligent agents produce complex and specified information (CSI), design theorists hypothesize that if a natural object was designed, it will contain high levels of CSI. Scientists then perform experimental tests upon natural objects to determine if they contain complex and specified information. One easily testable form of CSI is irreducible complexity, which can be tested and discovered by experimentally reverse-engineering biological structures through genetic knockout experiments to determine if they require all of their parts to function.
7 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
6 “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.
Ask, Seek, Knock
7 “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.
9 “Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11 If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! 12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.
The Narrow and Wide Gates
13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
True and False Prophets
15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
True and False Disciples
21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many Away from me, you evildoers!’
ID is a pseudoscience that seeks to make creationism more scientific by taking a less biblical approach and using unfounded claims to prove its own, despite any lack of evidence clearly indicative or seen in the peer-reviewed research. It is simply a branch in the tree of creationism and has already been disproven, by scientists, skeptics, and even a court of law in the Kitzmiller v. Dover case.
It assumes there is a creation but we only can speak of a creation after we have proven a creator, not the other way.
It says it is impossible for something to come from nothing. Well, what caused God? "God is eternal". The universe could be too...
The universe could even have come from nothing. The laws of physics and logic may not apply "before" the universe.
What intelligent design really says is that natural processes like natural selection didn't happen and that living things were created by a powerful being. However, this has no evidence for it and there are ways to prove it wrong. For example, you can't just create something out of nothing. Also, we have found fossils that prove intelligent design being wrong. In addition, you can't make a universe unless if you are outside of a universe but you can't be outside of a universe since there is no space and time outside of universes because space and time put together make a space-time continuum, which is the fabric of a universe. Scientists have actually found out why the Big Bang happened without a creator: A very powerful repulsive force caused the universe to start expanding.
The whole premises rely on a higher intelligence we can not measure with any kind of practical tools. What is the point of the having a theory we can't build off of and use for brocading our understanding. Its not worth the time in science lessons, and has nothing to do with a true scientific method.
A scientific idea must be supported by the available evidence, or must be deductible from self-evident axioms. There is no evidence of intelligent design, and instead creationists point to vague and fallacious philosophical arguments. Those who point to intelligent design are invariably ignorant of biology, physics or both- the world is easily explained without the need for a creator.
Following the first argument on the "yes" side, ID starts at point 6 (there is a designer). It is based on misrepresentation of facts, (e.G. "lack" of fossil evidence), appeals to incredulity ("it's impossible to imagine a world without a designer"). And concepts that have been repeatedly debunked (such as "irreducible complexity"). There is nothing scientific about ID.
Intelligent design is the belief that humans, and other creatures, were created by some form of deity to be "perfect." This belief is entirely derived from religious beliefs.
There is no scientific basis for intelligent design nor is there a great deal of evidence that provides a strong argument for it.
Intelligent design is entirely based off of religious superstition and is by no means "scientific."