[CarolinaGuitarman]

"That is exactly what you are saying"

No it wasn't, reread it again. I never said science can answer everything. It CAN however answer a great many things, like whether common descent is correct and what processes evolution most likely used. It cannot *prove* these things, but then again no science can prove it's claims.

"If science cannot answer something it is because it is not knowable for some reason."

No, it means we don't know the answer yet. ID says that we will never know the answers, but provides no evidence to back this up. I don't know what the limits of human knowledge are, and nobody else does. We certainly haven't approached those limits yet though. ID would have us throw up our hands and say *We will never know*. It's defeatism at it's worst, giving up without trying.

"If course, science can speculate endlessly but I don't consider that type of "science" to be worthy of the credibility we rightfully give to the hard sciences."

Which is why ID is not science and has no place in a science classroom.

[Ford4000]

In any practical sense we will never know what caused like to appear as it does. The strawman auguement that no science can be proved is really an attempt to elevate evolution science far above what it deserves because hard science can be reproduced in the lab while the history of a few million years ago cannot - certainly not to the level of being called (in its entirety) a fact worthy of silencing all other inquiry.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with critiquing evolution in the classroom as long as it is acedemically serious.