[nasamn777]

Perhaps you should read up on the subject before you are so quick to criticize it. How about reading Dembski's "No Free Lunch".

How does not addressing subject matter beyond the scope of scientific inquiry limit science?

So are you telling me that you cannot tell if a person died due to natural causes or by murder? Have you ever heard of forensic science?

And how about archeology? Can we determine if an artifact is due to natural processes or due to the craftsmanship of a early human?

How about SETI? Is it possible to distinguish a natural signal from an alien signal?

We can use natural science to determine a natural pattern from an intelligently designed pattern! ID is a useful science!

[js1138]

We can use natural science to determine a natural pattern from an intelligently designed pattern! ID is a useful science! ,p>Give us an example of where this has been done, when you don't know the history of the object.

[Dimensio]

So are you telling me that you cannot tell if a person died due to natural causes or by murder? Have you ever heard of forensic science?

Are you suggesting that murder is somehow supernatural, or are you just trying to change out definitions of "natural" because you think that I won't notice?

And how about archeology? Can we determine if an artifact is due to natural processes or due to the craftsmanship of a early human?

Humans are part of the natural universe, thus what they do is 'natural', when speaking of the scope of scientific inquiry.

We can use natural science to determine a natural pattern from an intelligently designed pattern! ID is a useful science!

But ultimately it will never be able to determine anything beyond the natural. And you will need to establish a specific criteria for determining what is "intelligently designed" and what is not; thus far ID proponents have not offered anythiing but assertions.