[PatrickHenry]

Okay, here's your latest definition:

Intelligent Design: A hypothesis wherein given features of life v non-life are explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

I would modify it as follows:

Intelligent Design: A[n] hypothesis wherein given features of life v non-life that are otherwise inexplicable are explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

And I think you would prefer something like this:

Intelligent Design: A[n] hypothesis wherein given features of life v non-life whether or not they are otherwise inexplicable are explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

[PatrickHenry]

1600?

[PatrickHenry]

As for the words in my proposals: "A[n] hypothesis" I found this:

A is used before consonants, an before a vowel sound. A comes before words that begin with a u, but are pronounced as though they began with a y: a union; a useful gadget. An comes before a silent h: an heir; an honour. Some people still use an before h in words from French, where the h was silent: an hotel. This is rather old-fashioned. There is no reason to use an before an h which is sounded.
Source: a or an.

So I guess it's "a hypothesis." But to my ear, it sounds a bit like "a apple." I'm just old-fashioned.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Setting up the perpetual motion machine, my friend?

[AntiGuv]

Well, the third version would be redundant. If we don't specify at all, then we are automatically disregarding whether the given features are otherwise inexplicable. I have no objection to your first modification - I think it would more precisely characterize Intelligent Design as it is ordinarily advocated - but I doubt that Alamo-Girl will agree to the modification.

Intelligent Design: A hypothesis wherein given features of life v non-life that are otherwise inexplicable are explained by an intelligent cause, rather than by an undirected process such as natural selection.*

What say you Alamo-Girl? Shall we accept this as our definition?

* Please note that I've changed "not by an undirected process" to "rather than by an undirected process" because it's more precise. If there's any objection to this, then now's the time!