Do you know what 'arguing by analogy' is? Becasue, despite my cautions, that's all you seem to do.
"'Pigs can't fly' is falsifiable."
Oh, is it? Can you prove that no pig is able to fly? I don't think so. You'd need to thorougly test every pig in the world.
Is that an unreasonable standard of proof to ask for? Of course it is, just as it is unreasonable for evolutionists to implicitly require absolute proof of ID (.9999999999 probability isn't good enough).
The irony is that as an evolutionist, you must be willing to concede that pigs may someday develop wings and start flying!
When I read the "arguments" presented against ID here by evolutionists, I can't help but think that they are parrotting the party line just as Democrats parrot the party line on Iraq, taxes, etc. So many evolutionists hear something about the philosophy of science and parrot it without really understanding it, thinking they are experts, and not realizing that they lost something critical in the translation.