Intelligent Design or unthinking blasphemy?

Exactly, so why expect science to pay heed to ID? The only "evidence" for ID is an endless round of PRATT-based ToE criticism. No positive evidence.Do you agree, therefore, that ID is not science and must be kept out of science class?

Riiiight. So ignorance is now equated to being "unbiased", yes?I'll tell you what, I dare you climb to the top of a tall building and jump off. I predict that gravity will send you crashing to a sticky end, but of course I could just be "biased" towards the idea of gravity... It's patently true! The creation wiki consistently misinterprets, misrepresents or criticses mainstream scentific research. The depth of the writers knowledge of these fields is demonstrably limited. There are no positive hypotheses. And absolutely NO evidence. ID is rhetoric. Agreed. ID is theology. But then you weasel out of this statement with some ridiculous mental gymnastics.. If, as you say, ID is not attempting to ascertain who or what the Designer is, then what science does ID have to teach?I can imagine the lesson...Teacher: Last month we talked about evolution and we looked into the evidence that exists to support it. Today we'll look at ID. ID says that a designer made everything. That's it for ID.Katie(sits at the front): That's it? But designed by who?Teacher: No one knows. ID doesn't even try to know.Katie: How?Teacher: No one knows. ID doesn't get into how.Katie: So there's no evidence?Teacher: I'm afraid not, Katie, but there are hundreds of arguments that say it is true.Katie: So what can you teach us about the ID process?Teacher: I'm afraid that's it, Katie. We're done. There goes the lunch bell!