[Heartlander]

I do not believe science should be bound by anything. This is my point. I believe that ID is only pointing to a corner in science. It is up to the scientific commune to find the other three (corners).

It is science that puts itself in a box if they believe a self-refutable statement like, “only what can be known by science or quantified and empirically tested is rational and true”.

It is an unsubstantiated philosophy like any other…

[<1/1,000,000th%]

I do not believe science should be bound by anything.

But science has been able to succeed inside its box. Otherwise it'll get bogged down in orthodoxy and won't be able to support our technological society (science tends to get bound up in orthodoxy periodically in spite of its box).

With ID, you're postulating a Designer to use as a filter on the observable data. Saying "evolution is wrong" is not evidence for a Designer.