Is Intelligent Design not scientific because you can't test it using the scientific process and it does not tell us anything about life and nature?

Answer 1

Answer

It is also true that evidence presented to the United States Supreme Court showed that Intelligent Design is Creationism under another name, and that its proponents had always intended it to be so. The Supreme Court found that Intelligent Design is not science.


Answer

The US Supreme Court has already determined, in Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 US 578 (1987), that intelligent design can't be taught in public schools because it has its basis in creationism, a religious concept.

Public schools are prohibited from teaching religion under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, sometimes called "separation of church and state," which forbids the enactment of any law "respecting an establishment of religion." The Establishment Clause is designed to protect individual rights "to select any religious faith or none at all" (Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 US 52 (1985)).

Answer

Yes, that's right. Intelligent design cannot be tested. No test can be devised to test for an invisible, supernatural entity which the Intelligent Designer is apparently deemed to be. Thus it is of no use to have a theory based on an intelligence that cannot be found or confirmed. Such a theory would not tell us anything. Everything we need is presented by the anatomy and ecology of animals and plants. That is what has been used and always will be used to derive facts about life and nature. There is no use in having a superfluous name like intelligent designer attached. All you are doing is looking at nature itself to derive your answers. You cannot look at an intelligent designer as it is undetectable. Intelligent Design as a 'theory' does indeed not tell us anything about the natural world.