Actually, engineering isn't science and isn't the scientific method. Science is about developing and testing new hypotheses. Engineering is the application of science, a very different discipline. So this comment is nonsensical.
You completely misunderstood my point. I would not expect Darwin to have the ability to predict specific changes in an ecosystem (that IS nonsense), but if his theory that the complexity of species increases over time is correct, then he would have to conclude that zebras, for example, would be more "complex" (perhaps in some unspecified manner that Darwin could not foresee) in 2002 than they were in 1830.
This comment by you only reinforces that you are grossly misrepresenting the scientific method and evolution.
The reality is that Intelligent Design is not science. At best, its a criticism of a scientific theory but it is not a scientific theory itself.
I'm sorry, this takes the insult of the day prize. Engineering not only requires a solid grounding in the scientific method, but also involves formulating hypothesis, and testing it( just attend some classes in heat transfer, fluid dynamics, or electrodynamics ). ACtually, most of what I hear representing the arguments of the 'soft science' folks here is a very cavalier application of the scientific method.