Can a beleiver in Intelligent Design please explain to me its scientific evidence and principles?

Question

I'm looking for informed answers.

Answer 1

http://answersingenesis.org

youll find all the credible info you need there

Answer 2

Science is limited by our (in)ability to observe. Therefore it is not a sufficient means to prove or disprove the biblical account of creation. I know, a lot of people assume that we have incredible abilities to observe the wonders of the universe. But that is simply not true. We have only a basic knowledge of space and it's vastness. Our understanding of subatomic particles continues to show us that we know even less than we previously thought. Big or little, we don't know as much as scientist pretend we do. Should we discuss the human body or our brain. Does anyone honestly feel that we have mastered even this?
Scientific theories come and go. They are modified because they didn't work. Then they are modified again because they still don't work. The bible remains.
Ask yourself what would happen if just one of the planets of our solar system was not there. Would the system even have developed? What if the attraction of subatomic particles was increased or decreased? How would the elements have formed?

Neither theory has irrefutable proof. Christians admit this and say that we have faith. Scientist these days refuse to admit it. Instead they point the finger and hurl insults. The holes in their theories are coverd by their faith.
My theory of creation is just as the bible says 6 days plus 1 of rest. as GK Chesterton put it;

It is absurd for the evolutionist to complain that it is unthinkable for God to make everything out of nothing, and then pretend that it is not more unthinkable that nothing should turn itself into everything.

Answer 3

From an objective standpoint, I'd think that the same evidence that proves evolution could be used to prove intelligent design. The difference is the theory behind them. What's so absurd about a god making things well enough that they naturally adapt as needed to their environment without him sitting over them? I mean, a god can do anything, right? Might as well do something really cool like that than just make something and have it stay the way it is.

Answer 4

There is no scientific evidence for ID. ID is not even science. Scientific theories, which includes the theory of gravity, aerodynamics, evolution, germinology etc. have a model and an explanation, and predicitions can be made from the models.

ID is simply a thinly veiled creationism. Other than trying to study things scientifically, it simply answers "God did it". You cannot make any predicition from ID, nor can you even establish a model on it.

Answer 5

Intelligent design is the theory that living things show signs of having been designed. ID supporters argue that living creatures and their biological systems are too complex to be accounted for by the Darwinian theory of evolution, and that a designer or a higher intelligence may be responsible for their complexity.
Many ID proponents do not quarrel with most of Darwin's original claims about evolution. They do, however, believe that random genetic mutation and natural selection cannot account for certain biological phenomena, such as the human eye or the body's blood clotting mechanism. ID supporters argue that for these systems to arise via a gradual series of mutations is statistically impossible, which implies that a designer may have guided the process. Is creationism the same thing as intelligent design? No, although many critics of Intelligent Design conflate the two. Creationism usually refers to the theory or belief that God created the universe and human beings in six days as recorded in the Bible's first book, Genesis.
In the United States today, some creationists--called Young Earth Creationists--accept the Genesis account literally and believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old, basing their calculations on the genealogies in the Hebrew scriptures. Young Earth creationists believe God created humans directly; humans did not evolve from other species.
Others, seeking to reconcile the Bible with modern science, believe that each Genesis day may have represented several billion years. (Gerald Schroeder, a physicist and Orthodox Jewish scholar, has calculated what the time spans may be.)
Intelligent design does not posit that the universe was created in six days; it does not contradict the commonly-held scientific view that the universe has been in existence for about 15 billion years. ID also does not challenge the idea that humans developed over time as a result of evolution.
However, critics of intelligent design have called it "creationism in a lab coat," saying that to point to an intelligent designer as the cause of certain biological systems is to abandon scientific inquiry. They argue that, over the decades, science has frequently closed "gaps" and explained previously inexplicable phenomena.
The argument from design, as it has been known for hundreds of years, was expounded most famously by William Paley, a 19th century British theologian. Using the analogy of the watchmaker, Paley argued that just as we infer a watchmaker from the complex workings of a pocket watch, we must infer a creator of the universe from the complex systems of the natural order.

Today's advocates of intelligent design maintain that while Paley's perspective was rooted in the idea of a benevolent Christian God, theirs is the outgrowth of scientific discovery, which has left some profound and fundamental phenomena, such as cell structure, unexplained. But the overwhelming majority of intelligent design advocates are Christians, and virtually all are theists.

Some critics equate intelligent design theory with the so-called "God of the gaps" fallacy—resorting to a divine intelligence to explain the existence of natural phenomena for which we have no scientific explanation. But proponents of intelligent design respond by arguing that their perspective is based upon the latest scientific inquiry into the complexity of the natural order and recognition that evolutionary and other more recent scientific theory is inadequate to explain many biological and physical phenomena.

Answer 6

Intelligent Design and Scientific Evidence are 100% incompatible.

using scientific evidence and scientific principles to explain itelligent design is oxymoronic.

Answer 7

You are looking for an answer better explained by a scientist.
I am not a scientist.
Lets look at the atom, a nucleus and electrons circling around it.
Now larger--A sun with planets circling around it.
Now larger--our solar system circling around a larger sun with other solar systems.
I see a design here. A physical law.
This is the best I could do with this answer.

Answer 8

intelligent design= god doing it all, but saying he wasn't involved. intelligemnt design is nothing more the creationism under another name. almost word for word writing in the explanation of each is proof of how creationists are trying to introduce creationism into schools but saying it isn't creationism.

Answer 9

The evidence is pocket watches. The principles are "created magically by god".

Answer 10

Believe it or not some of us believe in BOTH!