Comment: You are right.

(See in situ)

You are right.

Scientific theories must be falsifiable, and therefore can never be considered as fact. I might sound ignorant here... But I don't really know much about ID. I'm familiar with Micheal Behe, and the irreducible complexity of the flagellum. I had the privelage of workling with a biologist recently who did work with eel sperm (which functions normally with a reduced form of the flagellum), and I recieved a thourough lecture on how modified forms of the flagellum are quite functional. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the premise of ID seems to be "It looks designed, therefore it's designed." This is subjective! Something that looks designed to you might not look designed to someone else. For example, a snow flake appears to be designed. But we have a complete understanding of the properties of water and the physics involved in the crystillization of ice. When you say "ID has objective (I'm assuming that's what you meant) support" what are you referring to?

an idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government