Originally Posted by Taltos

This is what fascinates me about this topic. I disagree with the gross assumption that intelligent design cannot be proven or disproven. I believe that to be a terribly unscientific statement.

The top quoted section is really more on the topic I am interested in. How would you go about trying to apply the scientific method to intelligent design, if we start out with the premise that there are people who want to do this. If it truly cannot be proven, the science classrooms and thinktanks of the world seem the most apt places to reveal this, and I don't see why, as a hypothesis, it should not be submitted, evaluated, and analyzed under scientific scrutiny and skepticism. To "work on it", rather than outright dismissing it because you find it offensive to your beliefs.

I'm interested in what that curriculum would look like. What kind of tests would be done? What kind of questions would arrise? What form of evidence would be put forth, and what criteria for critically evaluating that evidence?