[gondramB]

For that matter, I’ve been a science teacher and have recently been asked back in some capacity. If kids ask about ID I see no problem in discussing that or whatever else they ask about that is at least marginally curriculum related.

But my answer would be that right now there isn’t scientific evidence for ID but then I’d go over what would be required. ID (or any other new theory) would need to either be testable in experiments or it would need to correctly predict real world events that can’t be predicted by other means.

I can see that leading into a discussion of how can you test theories like whether global warming will be a problem in the future - I’m in favor of anything that gets kids asking questions about science.

[AmishDude]

I don't understand. What is so sacrosanct about the scientific method that if a scientist, with peer-reviewed work in science itself also belongs to an organization that chooses not to use that method?

After all, Chomsky uses his position in the exceedingly trivial area of linguistics to expound on politics. To the point that he has no unexpressed thought.

Moreover, plenty of academic areas use the veneer of the scientific method to justify what is, at best, pseudoscience.