Because evolution does not postulate supernatural involvement. It is a valid scientific hypothesis.
My dog once flew due to it's fart.
There, I provided a theory that cannot be reproduced in a lab, and does not involve the supernatural. Does that mean you'll believe it as well?
Well, what kind of evidence do you have? None? Okay, next theory. Oh, evolution? What kind of evidence? Lots? Well, let's have a look then...
My dog once flew due to it's fart. There, I provided a theory that cannot be reproduced in a lab, and does not involve the supernatural. Does that mean you'll believe it as well?
No, that is not a theory, not even a hypothesis unless you can demonstrate that the dog did fly.
If you can do that, then his flying due to his farting is a valid hypothesis that can be examined, it certainly doesn't rise to the level of a theory without a lot more data.
I'm, willing to see it investigated as a part of science if you can demonstrate that he flew for some unknown reason. I certainly don't believe every hypothesis that is to be investigated, nor does any scientist.
I never said inteligent design was untrue.
I never said I don't believe in it.
I only said Inteligent Design is not Science any more than it is Electrical Engineering or Sculpture. They are both limited disciplines that do not cover everything. Not even mathematics is universal. There are numeric problems that lie outside the pervue of math.
I did say that inteligent design should properly be studied as a part of Theology, not science, not engineering, not art, not mathematics.
It has it's own specialty with sophisticated intelectual tools that work very well, Why would you try to demean Inteligent Design by pushing it into the circumscribed world of science, when, if true, it is so much larger than science?
So9