Can't ID be tested AT ALL?

One way would be to understand the designer. Once we've done that we can then say what we would expect that designer to do, and test to see if that is what we find. So, perhaps something like "I am the alpha" appearing at the start of all DNA sequences.This is exactly what ToE does and is subject to testing. It defines the designer - mutations coupled with selection (to simplify), and then uses that to make tests of what we would expect to find.However, the ID movement refuses to actually define their designer, rendering testing for its involvement impossible. The only part of their designer they seem willing to define is 'intelligence'. We don't know what kind of intelligence we should find or what the goal of this intelligence was. As such we cannot detect if that kind of intelligence was involved.ID does things backwards. It says, if something cannot be explicitly explained with natural explanations, it must have been guided by an intelligent agent. Just like Lightening was Thor. This leaves ID with the position of 'since we don't know exactly how x occurred, it must have been our explanation.'Until we actually have a description of our intelligent designer I don't think it can be tested, anymore than evolution could be tested before a description of the natural designer was formulated.

What would be interesting would be to test this 'specified complexity' stuff out. First we can use intelligence to design something, then we can use an evolution like system to evolve it. Then we test for specified complexity and see if it can tell the difference.Unfortunately IDists think that by designing the environment, there is an IDer which would invalidate this research. However I don't think that's true. Evolution would be a fine theory even if God/whoever designed an appropriate environment for it to happen in.I guess we need to wait on the ID movement to help out on this.

As Dembski himself says:I say maybe it does. However, the onus is on the IDers to demonstrate that this specified complexity is not a feature of any design rather than just intelligent design. So far all they are doing is saying "Everything that is designed by humans has an intelligent designer. Therefore everything that is designed through some process must have an intelligent designer".Its one hell of a leap of logic.

Wow - Indiana Jones has replied to one of my threads Welcome!

---

The test you propose does not test 'specified complexity', which is the nature of the test I was proposing in the post you were responding to here.