You have no clue how ridiculous your words look, do you? Are you even sober? Do you care about your looks? Well then straighten up, fellow -- you look like a fool and a charlatan.
The fact is, science IS naturalism, period. If you don't like naturalism, then by definition you cannot be a scientist. You could be a philosopher or theologian or something else, but science by definition deals with the natural world, not the supernatural.
Creationism / Intelligent Design requires the totally unspecified intervention of a now undefined but unnatural factor -- a Creator or some Intelligence. But there's no basis in science for it, and that's why it's not science.
Indeed. Douglas Futuyma, Evolutionary Biology (1998)...
"Darwin showed that material causes are a sufficient explanation not only for physical phenomena, as Descartes and Newton had shown, but also for biological phenomena with all their seeming evidence of design and purpose. By coupling undirected, purposeless variation to the blind, uncaring process of natural selection, Darwin made theological or spiritual explanations of the life processes superfluous. Together with Marx’s materialistic theory of history and society and Freud’s attribution of human behavior to influences over which we have little control, Darwin’s theory of evolution was a crucial plank in the platform of mechanism and materialism"