[Aric2000]

There are a number of prominent KOOKS currently working on ID. Here are a few bios and links that you can Laugh at:

Geez these ID'rs just kill me, take a little creationism, throw in some darwinism, and boom, we have ID.

Creationism with scientific backing.

Sorry folks. ID is a no go, when you can prove that there is a creator, then come see me, but until you CAN prove it, it will NOT be scientific. I wanna meet him, shake his hand, say howdy, ask him how he could screw up as badly as he did.

When you can do that, THEN we will talk scientific theory.

Until then, I laugh at your silly theory and your claims that it is scientific!!

[scottiewottie]

One of the more facinating things about ID is that a creator does not need to be found at all. You can have ID by simple self-existent principles of law and organization that are not created. Rather than a bang, you can have ID with matter that has always existed. No need to invent an origin for wheel, ID simply discovers the wheel that by observation was made out of pre-existent, uncreated matter.

[Dimensio]

Actually, you don't 'prove' anything in science. Science is about drawing conclusions from observations, but nothing is 'proven' in science.

The biggest problem that I have with ID is that no one so far has presented an adequate method for falsifying it. Scientific theories must have falsification criteria or they are worthless.