Science does not disprove intelligent design

Thank you for your excellent rebuttal. I will begin the last round with a few refutations and I will conclude. Thank you for an excellent debate. Kudos to you!I will start off with one my opponent's previous refutations to "Perhaps we were all made as human beings last Thursday with our memories made with us." Even though it is just an example and it sounds very wild and out of the ordinary, my opponent's response to this is of great importance. However, please keep in mind that this debate is about whether science can disprove intelligent design, not about whether intelligent design is true. My opponent's rebuttal to this is, "Your claim contradicts all human experience and rationality." What is human rationality and why is it here? Is our experience and rationality the one and true sense of the world and should we actually listen to it? It is manmade. We have no scientific explanation of morals, our "human rationality", and emotions except for "chemicals." However this is a different argument. Our rationality and experience has nothing to do with science, and this does not render intelligent design disproven. In our own minds, we may deem it dismissed and illogical, but in the grand scheme of things, we have no proof to serve it as not true. As with God - we as mankind have been worshipping them since the dawn of our being. Today, more than 80% of the world believes in a higher power. Who it is does not matter, but we as humans look at the miraculousness, beauty, complexity, and advanceness of the world around us and conclude that this is not coincidence.My opponent has stated, "Currently, all the evidence points to the fact that intelligent design was unnecessary for any phase of the creation of life and the universe, and other theories, like evolution, offer better claims, substantiated by evidence, to offer answers."Unless every possible dimension of the universe can be explored entirely, we cannot conclusively declare that there is no God. What we have discovered so far serves no proof for God. However, so far. Faith is a very different discussion, but if there is physical evidence of an intelligent creator somewhere lurking behind a star or galaxy, we have not been there, therefore we don't know. We cannot deem it false, because saying it is false is conclusively stating that it is not true, when indeed it is not conclusive at all.Science has its limits. So saying, "Trust in only what can be scientifically proven" is contradictory because this statement cannot be proven itself through the scientific method. If the intricies of DNA were to be examined in all its complexity and glory, how could there be no designer? How could this have happened by accident?As with Axioms, and being disproven by empiricism and empirical experience, if this intelligent designer was as mighty as everyone previously stated, what human found evidence and man-made reasoning is needed? We are so puny and insignificant as science has shown, that it shouldn't even be considered to disprove intelligent design.As for my opponent's ex nihilo argument, I apologize for not correctly acknowledging that last round - I completely forgot!With this scientific research and assumptions on the scale and energy of our universe, we must keep in mind that whatever deity we are talking about is assumed to be greater than us and the rest of the universe itself. We must acknowledge that everything ever claimed and asserted about the cosmos can and could be incorporated into the designer's creationary process. And with this statement, it cannot be disproved because we as humans cannot simply detect it with our five senses, yet. So in conclusion - intelligent design cannot be disproven by science due to the larger scale of this designer and how it can all of what we know about this universe be created. Science has its limits and even like religion, can be contradictory. No amount of human-discovered "evidence" can show the absense of a God. While we may assume that this is false until proven otherwise, that does not mean science accurately showed that there is no designer.Again, thank you to my opponent for an intriguing debate. Good luck with the votes my friend! http://en.wikipedia.org...http://en.wikipedia.org...