Joined: May 2007
IMO both evolution by natural selection and evolution by intelligent design are best described as models of the origin of the variety seen in life.
There is one very clear diference between these two models. The model of evolution by natural selection has been described in detail and the mechanisms contained in it can be seen to explain many aspects of how the current biosphere evolved.
Evolution by intelligent design on the other hand is extremely vague on details. It concentrates solely on pointing out aspects of evolution that may still be difficult to accept as having been reached by natural selection. Mostly its proponents use arguments of personal incredulity which in itself are complete null arguments.
Unless the ID movement can present mechanisms by which ID is supposed to work that can be falsified by experiment it cannot be credited even with the title scientific hypothesis. Of course it will not be possible for the ID movement to present any credible mechanisms (ie. one's that work by natural laws). This would push the question only to the evolution of the intelligent designer.
Any designer working outside the natural laws could then also be called 'god'. Therefore the debate would become a theological debate about a creator god, which is how it should be.
The real problem is the way the ID movement uses smoke screens, deception and outright lies to push this theological debate into the scientific arena.
My hope is that the scientific community will concentrate on finding ways to explain the aspects of evolution that the ID movement exploits. At least then there would come something out of this whole sorry saga.