I'll take that assertion seriously when an intelligent design proponent points me to some things that aren't designed.
Again, from a scientific standpoint, SETI and forensic science use design detection – along with other branches of science. We use design detection all the time...
The SETI analog would be assuming all signals received from space are from ET intelligences, just as every object in the universe is designed.
If there aren't any natural signals what are you comparing to, just as if there aren't any undesigned objects, what are you comparing to?
It appears the term “intelligent design” has been conscripted. As used in the OP and by some here it is mere word play. A lot of words to describe “pattern detection.”
Although I think it is very amusing the term has been stolen from creationists, they share one major attribute: neither is even CLOSE to a Scientific Theory. They have not even reached the “guess” stage, much less a testable H0.
Asimov, God rest his soul, would be proud.
I think I see the problem now. What I believe regarding a designer (God) has no bearing on ID theory. A rock is not designed - an arrowhead is designed - DNA could be designed by space aliens. ID is not concerned with who designed – it tries to determine if something is designed – which is why I gave the examples of SETI and forensic science.