Examine the basic claims of the two ideas (intelligent design and Darwinism) with regard to a particular biochemical system like, say, the bacterial flagellum. The claim of intelligent design is that “No unintelligent process could produce this system.” The claim of Darwinism is that “Some unintelligent process could produce this system.” To falsify the first claim, one need only show that at least one unintelligent process could produce the system. To falsify the second claim, one would have to show the system could not have been formed by any of a potentially infinite number of possible unintelligent processes, which is effectively impossible to do. Continue reading
It is this worry of falsely ascribing something to design only to have it overturned later that has prevented design from entering science proper.
This worry, though perhaps justified in the past, can no longer be sustained. There does in fact exist a rigorous criterion for discriminating intelligently from unintelligently caused objects. Many special sciences already use this criterion, though in a pretheoretic form (for example, forensic science, artificial intelligence, cryptography, archeology, and the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence).
— William Dembski, from Science and Evidence for Design in the Universe, p. 23
The main thrust of the intelligent design movement is that intelligent agency as an aspect of scientific theory making has more explanatory power in accounting for natural phenomenon than chance or scientific law. What that means is that when there is a phenomenon of some sort, saying that an intelligent agent is the cause of it makes more sense than saying it just happened by chance or it happened because of a natural or scientific law.
— Francis Beckwith, from the Evolution In The Schools and In The Law lecture, disk 1 at 6:56
ID claims that the irreducible complexity of biological matter, especially cell life, makes evolutionary development without intelligent design a statistical improbability bordering on impossibility; thus intelligent design, and hence an intelligent Designer, seems like the best inference to draw.
— D. A. Carson, from The God Who is There – Leaders Guide, p. 24
The fundamental claim of intelligent design is straightforward and easily intelligible: namely, there exist natural systems that cannot be adequately explained in terms of undirected natural causes and that exhibit features which in any other circumstance we would attribute to intelligence.
— William Dembski, from The Design Revolution, p. 45