Assume ID is true

quote:

---

It's not possible to completely make the presence of God a provable fact.

---

Is it even possible to make the presence of God a testable scientific proposal?

quote:

---

All ID's can do is see how natural processes could not make lifeforms, and then see that these life forms were MADE, not evolved.

---

Sorry, but positive claims need positive evidence. Showing that evolution could not have produced the species we see today in no way supports ID. ID needs positive evidence, such as the observation of a supernatural being changing the DNA of a living species.

quote:

---

And another thing, one big reason the ID's don't completely affiliate themselves with God is because Atheists have crucified any Godly scientists as being non-scientific.

---

We judge the science separate from the scientist, that is always how it is done. Michael Behe, for example, has published several papers in scientific journals. However, none of his intelligent design stuff has passed peer review. In fact, Darwin was a Godly scientist, so your claim seems to be falling short.

quote:

---

For example I mentioned in an earlier thread the bacteria which were genetically modified to produce human insulin back in 1982. I don't know if you can tell by analysing these bacteria that they have been engineered, but if you can that's the sort of thing I meant.

---

This kind of phenomena is testable in two areas: 1. twin nested hierarchies, 2. production of a non-beneficial system.1. Twin nested hiearchies: this is a fundamental observation in biology. Both morphology/fossil record AND DNA similarities form identical phylogentic trees. A bacteria with genes identical to human genes (ie insulin genes) violates this twin nested hierarchy. Therefore, given our actual observation of an actual design process in humans, we should come to the conclusion that a design process will violate a twin nested hiearchy.2. Production of a non-beneficial protein system: When asked how one could falsify evolution Darwin responded by saying that evolution would be falsified if a species were produced for the sole purpose of benefitting another species. Bacteria containing insulin genes fulfills this falsification of evolution. Therefore, if one is to detect design we should find the same thing. However, we don't. So again, trying to detect design in nature fails a second time when compared with observed instances of biological intelligent design.