The $5,000,000 ID Research Challenge

Isn't there that strong possibility for a number of grant proposals? A lot of this depends on your perception, too. For some of you, there's not a trace of a clue that biological life was engineered, while for others there are such clues.But I really don't think we need $5,000,000 to test specific ID hypotheses. Some of the hypotheses I outlined a few pages back could be neatly tested using standard bioinformatic techniques. If ID is to make any headway in academia, it will be through the medium of the scientific literature. By proposing novel hypotheses to current biological problems (e.g., the problem of the origin of life), the ID position could be tested.

That probably wasn't research on intelligent design as a biological hypothesis, was it? Although the exact details appear to be elusive, I strongly suspect that what the Templeton Foundation actually funded was research by ID proponents on subjects like the limits of protein evolution. Understanding the limits of protein evolution is of interest to ID researchers, but that in itself does not test the notion that biological life was engineered. But I'm not asking for that. I suggest testing specific ID hypotheses (instead of focusing only on the limits to Darwinian evolution). Sure, there's the risk that "if there are grants to do real actual science research into ID the results" will demonstrate that ID is a futile area of research. But then again, there's the chance that the ID hypotheses will be experimentally validated, and this would lead to a whole new area of research. The proposition that biological life on Earth was engineered is religion? Please elaborate on how the above idea is religious in nature.Now, the Intelligent Design Movement certainly has a religious and political agenda, but let's not confuse the movement with the idea.Edited by Genomicus, : No reason given.