Precisely. They are the ones who declare ID to be "unscientific" merely because it implies a Creator. Narrow minds and all that. They are the ones who would exclude inferences, implications, possibilities, hunches, and the like as being "unscientific." Fortunately they do not corner the market in science, let alone truth and education in general.
They are the ones who declare ID to be "unscientific" merely because it implies a Creator.
No, they call it unscientific because it doesn't conform to the basic standards of science. Funny how we insist on standards, huh?
They are the ones who would exclude inferences, implications, possibilities, hunches, and the like as being "unscientific."
Kindly cite one example of this canard.
Scientists don't discount hunches. On the contrary, they rely on hunches. What they don't accept is the notion that hunches are a substitute for scientific evidence. But then we're back to those pesky standards.
This is just more of the affirmative action whining. You can't create a coherent theory to support ID, so you want to lower scientific standards to your level.