No, no, no - we are told that the design inference can produce reliable results, so we set off to explore that hypothesis. If it's testable, it quite nicely falls within the range of the scientific method. And if it proves to be untestable for one reason for another, then Dembski and ID theorists must withdraw it from the realm of science. But in either case, it was not I who proposed the design inference as science - it was ID theory. So let's find out if they're right.
In effect, what the General seems to be saying is that, if something cannot be demonstrated by means of the scientific method, then that something cannot be real.
Nope. I am testing the claims of ID theory - that design is real, and can be discovered via the design inference. Now, if you want to say that design is undetectable, that's fine, but you're parting company with Dembski and ID theorists...
Certainly so. Just as evolution theory must be understood for what it is, and not confused with science.