Intelligent design is science, defendants say, because the "irreducible complexity" of some aspects of the natural world cannot be accounted for otherwiseSo, those who would have intelligent design taught in science classes are making the argument that gee, this stuff is hard, I give up, therefore, God did it?
God don't dig on the lazy, c'mon now.
The intelligent design people seem incapable of uttering the word "yet." Add "yet" to the end of the above quotation: " . . . some aspects of the natural world cannot be accounted for otherwise, yet." See, that's science - acknowledging that we don't know everything yet but we'll do our damndest to try. Intelligent design is the theoretical equivalent of a period. As in, game over. If it wants to be taught as though it were a legitimate scientific theory (a designation denied to evolution), then it should adopt a "yet" philosophy.
Except it won't.
Intelligent design is most please with complacency. It rests on the premise that those affected by the design seek not intelligence, but certainty - even if the cost is ignorance.