How one would go about doing so? I have no idea. What may be possible in the future, I do not know either. But once again...
Just as with the Ancient Greeks who hypothesized the existence of the Atom, they had no way for many centuries to prove it, nor could they imagine any way it could be done. But eventually it WAS able to be done.. and guess what? They were right. But if all scientists had accepted the idea that it was unprovable, it would never have even been attempted.
Well, there is no "just as" about it! Greek atomism was predicated on materialism, and their inability to demonstrate the empirical consequences of this hypothesis in no way vitiates the power of their insight. On the contrary, the uncanny power of their insight shines across the two millenia that transpired antecedent to their vindication.
ID, OTOH, is nothing more than a reversion to the mysticism that the ancient Greeks so startlingly and unaccountably departed from.
Someone earlier asked told me to go preach the stuff in my church. Well, I do not go to church.. I am not even Christian, nor muslim, nor anything else. If anything, I am agnostic bordering on atheist.
Do I believe in a God like some big white shining guy on a golden throne.. no, I don't.
Do I believe in a God who even cares very much about what goes on here? Not really.
Do I believe in a creator of SOME FORM.. a strong maybe.
Someone earlier mentioned a theory some believe in about aliens visiting here, and maybe latering dna and such. I would actually tend to lean more to this theory than any. If such beings do exist, and it is possible that they had a hand in our past, they could even turn out to be what we came to call "God". I have no idea, but I wanna know.
I do not like us putting on blinders to any idea. I do not care about the "moral implications". I just wanna know the truth.
If our knowledge of the atom had not advanced any further since the Ancient Greek conception, we would have no basis to call it a valid theory, either. Democritus happened to make a lucky guess about the fundamental nature of matter - many other such guesses have proven wrong throughout the centuries. The science behind the claim didn't come until later.
The scientific evidence points powerfully to common descent, that's universally known in the science world. Natural selection, lateral gene transfer, genetic drift, etc. are known to be able to (testably) explain a lot of what we observe in the evolutionary record. A lot remains unexplained, indeed. Could an Intelligent Designer be involved in that void? Of course it's possible. But for now, such a supposition lies on the level of Democritus' hypothesis. Unless someone can posit an experiment or potential data find that validates the claim and can explain exactly why it validates the claim to the exception of other, simpler explanations (as evolutionary biology has repeatedly done), ID remains nothing more than a philosophy.
"Just as with the Ancient Greeks who hypothesized the existence of the Atom, they had no way for many centuries to prove it, nor could they imagine any way it could be done. But eventually it WAS able to be done.. and guess what? They were right. But if all scientists had accepted the idea that it was unprovable, it would never have even been attempted.
You make it sound as though scientists were actively considering the Greek concept of the atom as put forward by Democritus as science the entire time only to discover its true nature when the technology presented itself. This isn't true. It wasn't of any scientific interest until Joseph Guy-Lussac figured out that in the combination of two gases that resulted in a third gas, the resulting volume was proportional to the volume of the original two gases, indicating a combination of some sort of particles. From there Avogadro, Maxwell and Boltzman, and others, developed the idea of molecules.
The question becomes:
If we consider current ID to be Democritus's particle, should we assume it to be correct and waste energy on it with the hope, but no guarantee, that we will eventually be able to identify the designer.
Or should we forget it for now and trust that an Avogadro will turn up when the technology is available and renew interest in it, if it is indeed true?