I believe my third paragraph sets mine apart.... in the end, a Mathematical theory is in every essential sense the same animal as a scientific theory, even though they are constructed differently.
Both provide conceptual frameworks having broad explanatory power over the topics within their respective scopes. Both are subject to potential falsification, at least in principle. These are essential attributes of theories in the scientific sense of the word.
We’ve been discussing falsification off-and-on throughout this thread. At post 103 I give the reasons I suspect randomness is the most likely target for falsification of the theory of evolution, or at least a major pillar of it. From what I can see, the randomness blow would not be dealt by I.D. but rather by scientists working on the algorithmic nature of the genetics.
If that pillar were to be falsified, does it “upset Darwin’s apple-cart” or just put a nasty dent in it?