Oh really? How so? Have you ever known a hypothesis to be created apart from intelligent design? Or a theory? Or an explanation of so-called natural phenomenon?
The problem is that in debate the one advocating a position (here, you) takes on the burden of proof.
Theories do not require proof. Neither does science. Theories require evidence to be sure. In this case it is massive amounts of organized matter that behaves according to predictable laws. An intelligent designer can easily, and reasonably, be inferred and set forth as explanatory of the same.
What matters is that Flying Spaghetti Monsterism is word-for-word identical to the stated tenets of ID.,/I>
No it is not. Surely you know what "word for word" means. Flying spaghetti monsters have no basis in reality that I am aware of. Intelligent designers do.
Get it through your head. You are saying that ID created science. That means ID is above and outside of science. It is bigger than science. Science cannot model what it outside its own demenses. Therefore, ID (as you so strangely interpret it) is not science.
Theories do not require proof. Neither does science.
You're trying to change the argument. "Burden of proof" is the technical term in debate, which we're engaged in. It means you can't just state something without backing it up, otherwise your position is by default considered lost. It doesn't mean you have to absolutely prove your point.
In your attempt at debate, you've already exhibited several logical fallacies, the biggest of which is Petitio Principii. If you don't understand that fallacy, just answer this question: Exactly when did you take over from Monica in "servicing" Bill Clinton?
No it is not. Surely you know what "word for word" means.
It is. I do. In fact, the text promoting Flying Spaghetti Monsterism can be found at the Discovery Institute, the foremost proponent of ID. You fill in the blanks with God. Heathens fill in the blanks with the Flying Spaghetti Monster. True divinely blessed people know in their hearts that the blanks are filled by the Invisible Pink Unicorn (PBUHH).
Flying spaghetti monsters have no basis in reality that I am aware of. Intelligent designers do.
That is personal belief, which has no basis in a science discussion.
There is no difference between reality and unreality.