Intelligent design is not science

Firstly let's look at the two most popular Theories'. First The Big Band/Evolution: In the beginning millions and millions of years ago, there was nothing, then, nothing exploded, and created everything....... This is believed by most scientists (For a real run down of the big bang please see http://www.big-bang-theory.com...) Second Creationism/Intelligent Designer: Belief that a man who is his own father can save you if you telepathically accept him as your master. He can remove the evil force that is in your soul because a woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree........ To me both seem stupid...... I would also like to address the 1st point you bring forward [QUOTE] 1. In the majority opinion of the US Supreme Court Case Edwards v. Aguillard the US Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan noted that alternative 'scientific' theories could be taught in public schools. This would indicate that the court did not consider Intelligent Design an alternate 'scientific" theory. (1) [END QUOTE] Now just because the courts do not consider it "scientific" does not prove it is, Governments are usually wrong about these things, and don't think this is a relevant point to this argument as it proves nothing. Now to your points on my comment on how ID should be taught because of both theory's being popular. "1. The ID movement is largely an American phenomenon and is rarely seen in other countries (5)" I am from Australia and ID is a big theory here, also an Intelligent Designer fits into the definition of "God" so there for anyone who believes in 'God' believes in an Intelligent Designer. 2. Even the majority of Christians support the theory of evolution (6) Christians isn't even in this table, and Evolution is not what we are debating we are talking about the initial creator not what happened after the creation, also this emphasizes my point if most Christians believe in evolution then therefore a part of the Christianity belief, which holds the belief in a Intelligent designer (aka God), also believes in evolution which you cannot deny is Scientific, So if part of the belief in a Intelligent Designer is Scientific then why can't the Intelligent Designer be scientific?????? It would have taken a fare amount of science for this Intelligent Designer to create the universe and all its laws and elements. So therefore it is science. 3. The scientific community rejects the belief that ID is a scientific theory (7), and we are talking about the "science" class room. Well if you refer to my simple definitions of each theory, they both sound stupid, so why not teach both, it's just the Intelligent Design theory includes a magical designer rather than nothing like the big bang theory. You last quote [QUOTE] "In short, I will restate my claim that ID is not a scientific theory. It is just an empty belief about how we got here that lacks any mechanism to explain our origins." [END QUOTE] Let's use my simple explanation of the Big Bang theory again, the one that is taught in the classroom and classed as scientific. "The Big Band/Evolution: In the beginning millions and millions of years ago, there was nothing, then, nothing exploded/expanded, and created everything......." PLEASE also check the link http://www.big-bang-theory.com... Then ask yourself does that sound scientific to you?