[cornelis]

not capable of being disproven and thus fails the critical test of being "scientific," they cross a crucial line with me

Sorry, I can't resist:
(a) you hold a theory (b) I disprove it, (c) therefore it is science!

Dr. Stochastic would be interested in such reversals!

[StJacques]

". . . Sorry, I can't resist:

(a) you hold a theory (b) I disprove it, (c) therefore it is science! . . ."

As an exercise in epistemological reasoning, you are correct cornelis.

But no one has disproved the Theory of Evolution. There are debates over a number of theoretical issues and specific applications of the theory, but no "scientific" critique that disproves its major points has yet been offered.

Or were you suggesting that Intelligent Design and/or Young Earth Creationism had been scientifically disproven and could therefore be considered scientific by default? I'm not really sure here.