The way it looks now, its as if mainstream science insists its favorable interpretation of the evidence is the only possible one. The arrogance, ridicule and hostility toward other interpretations is appauling.
There are plenty of times when there are two contradictory interpretations of the same set of evidence and there is no ridicule or hostility. For an easy example look at the evolution of birds. The same set of evidence leads some scientists to interpret that dinosaurs evolved into birds, whilst some say that birds and dinosaurs shared a relatively recent common ancestor.
The only time other interpretations are sharply critiqued is as a result of a lack of positive evidence.. For example, I could say that all humans are living in a matrix, controlled by artificial intelligent machines that we designed. Or I could say that I am just a brain in a jar, making up the reality I 'see'. That's great for philosophical conversations, but it is not scientific.
Lets go to the old ID analogy. We know that 747s and watches were designed and built by an intelligent agent because tools are needed to construct them. If the ID movement can show us what tools were needed to design or build humans then they would be on the way to science. Unfortunately, since the building blocks of life happily bond with one another chemically (with no need of tools), it seems like ID can't take the same road that leads us to infer that watches are designed. Oops, I'm drifing off topic here a little aren't I?
Eternity is in love with the productions of time.
The busy bee has no time for sorrow.
The hours of folly are measur'd by the clock; but of wisdom, no clock can measure.
™ Version 4.2