ID and creation make absolutely zero specific, falisifiable, fulfilled predictions. Evolution does. Of course, not every prediction of every one of the thousands of hypotheses of which evolutionary theory is comprised have proven correct, so, as with any theory, it has been adjusted and improved as new data has come along. This is one of the virtues of science.
Here's a typical prediction of evolution (from the link):
"Almost all animals make Vitamin C inside their bodies. It was predicted that humans are descended from creatures that could do this, and that we had lost this ability. (There was a loss-of-function mutation, which didn't matter because our high-fruit diet was rich in Vitamin C.) When human DNA was studied, scientists found a gene which is just like the Vitamin C gene in dogs and cats. However, our copy has been turned off."
Can you give one, just one, specific prediction made by ID or creationism? By specific, I mean as in pertaining to the discovery of a specific fossil, a specific gene, a specific type of animal or plant, a specific distribution of a particular biological population, etc.? ("Irreducible complexity must exist" is not a specific prediction, mind you.)
Yeah but our gene for vitamin C Synthesis was more like gerbils than the monkey's evolution claims we descended from. So vitamin C synthesis really doesn't support evolution in any way.
Sure Creationist predicted that there would be evidence contradicting radiometric ages. Radioisotope halos and diamond crystal studies are providing that evidence.
Creationist reasoned that the magnetic flips must not have taken thousands of years each in accordance with evolutionary beliefs, but must have occurred relatively quickly. A rock was found that recorded a flip occuring within a matter of weeks as the rock cooled.
By specific, I mean as in pertaining to the discovery of a specific fossil, a specific gene, a specific type of animal or plant, a specific distribution of a particular biological population, etc.? "
Creationists predicted that none of the human organs would turn out to be vestigal as evolutionists claimed and turns out that none are.
Creationists predicted that the "non-coding (junk) DNA" would turn out to have function, and we are continuing to discover new functions in that code.
Creationists predicted that no gay genes would be found, and none have been.
Creation predicts that we wouldn't find missing links between man and ape, and we haven't. Along 6 different categories of measurement, all primate fossils are either clearly ape or clearly man with the exception of brain size which overlaps.
Specific genes? Well, I've already pointed out in this tread that it was the Creationist, George Mendel, who discovered Genetics. So it seems Creationists do have a history of predicting genes as we started the process.
What creationists don't do well, is predict fossils, but then neither does evolution. We know that God made a greater diversity, if only because we were already aware of extinct species long before evolution and Darwin. But we don't predict, what kind of diversity, we will find.
Evolution on the other hand, makes lots of predictions about what kind of fossils will be found, but most of those predictions are still waiting. And then again, there's that report this week of the baleen whale with teeth, that evolution didn't expect. So Creation may not be a great model for predicting fossils, but really, neither is Evolution.