[airforceF4]

Agree. All I want is a testible hypothesis from the ID crowd. Telling me i "gotta believe" isn't science.

[laxin4him]

I have always wanted a "testible hypothesis" from the evolution crowd but there is no such testible hyposthesis to be able to get something from nothing.

They can always produce results from already created materials but have yet to create something from nothing.

[Ace of Spades]

Telling me i "gotta believe" isn't science.

Not in the slightest. It's why people 500 years ago believed the Sun revolved around the Earth.

[Grig]

"All I want is a testible hypothesis from the ID crowd."

If earth's ecosystem is the result of intelligent design, then it is very unlikely that this would be the ONLY planet they designed, and also unlikely that they would not re-use designs when possible. If it's by evolution then it would be virtually impossible for evolution to duplicate the result we see here on earth.

The existance of one other planet that also has or had a native human population would be a major proof of ID and a virtual impossibility for evolution. The existance of many such planets would be overwhelming proof of ID.

[4woodenboats]

Telling me i "gotta believe" isn't science.

Are you saying you are bucking the trend to blindly accept Darwinism?

[GregoryFul]

Here is a testable theory of ID. If some designer made DNA, and made it with intention to survive many different environments that the "package" could have encountered, then one would expect DNA to be able to generate life in environments rich in active elements other than carbon, that can be a basis of living systems.

If one could show that DNA could generate viable cells based on other than carbon based chemistry, (say silicon), what would the judges say?