Is ID Science?

Part of a comment of Steve Petermann of Telic Thoughts addressing the question of whether ID is science appears below.

"I'm for open inquiry in all forms of human exploration. It seems that the only purpose this label has taken on is to close down or denigrate novel ideas or approaches. Since I don't think the sky is falling because of ID, it should take its place along other controversial ideas where they will succeed or fail based on their merits over time."

Very well said. When the question is posed it is generally an attempt to denigrate ID. Often those posing the question have the view that simply classifying something as science confers a plausibility to an idea. In what parallels a marketing principle, respect for science is associated with what is considered scientific. In reality though, scientific plausibility is linked to the application of scientific methodology and is dependent on a yield of supporting data.

Petermann's point as to how ID will ultimately be judged is on target. Results will determine its fate. In the meanwhile attempting to shut down ID runs counter to human nature which seeks to explore even those ideas that are uncomfortable for some.