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
Intelligent design is modest in what it attributes to the designing intelligence responsible for the specified complexity in nature. Continue reading
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
Committed materialists will no doubt think that intelligent design is overemphasizing biology’s current problems and that a materialistic solution can be found in time. Yet the fact remains that there are no detailed, testable models for how known material mechanisms can generate biological complexity—only a variety of wishful speculations.
— William Dembski, from The Design Revolution, p. 218