Does ID follow the scientific method?

Dawn Bertot in Message 3 of the original thread proposal writes:In general any theory or ideology that attempts to explain the physical world will have the same basic tenets of fact gathering. I will suggest what I believe to be the basics in this connection and then we will see if those can be be built upon, so as to completely distinquish the scientific method (SM hereafter refered to in this thread) from the IDM (Intelligent Design method)It is my contention that these basics will remain the same upon investigation, so as not to be distinguished from the IDMThese basics are of course:Observation, evaluation, experimentation (tests), corroboration, determination, predictions (if you will) and of course conclusions

Coyote writes:...how one can reliably determine whether a particular item is designed or not.

Dawn Bertot writes:We are dealing with methods and whether they are scientific in approach, not conclusionsdesign is the conclusion of a scientific approach, not provable in the same way a view that only natural causes are the causethis is why I said earlier science minds make bad philosophers, logicians and debaters. Im sorry but that is true because you cannot distinguish between these two simple items

Dawn Bertot writes:Please demonstrate why my observations of nature, my experiments, my evaluations and my predictions of what nature will reveal, are not science