The Biophysical Society Executive Board issued the following statement regarding evolution, creationism, Intelligent Design (stealth creationism): http://www.biophysics.org/pubaffairs/evolution.pdf

From paragraph 3:
"What distinguishes scientific theories from these theological beliefs is the scientific method, which ... involves the formulation of hypotheses that can be refuted."

There are specific statements made by IDers (and other creationists) that are demonstrably false. But the general issue of ID is not science IN ANY SENSE, because it cannot possibly be falsified (refuted).

You, tff, are always on target.

From paragraph 3:
"What distinguishes scientific theories from these theological beliefs is the scientific method, which ... involves the formulation of hypotheses that can be refuted."

Contemplate another view that will not contemplate the prospect of challenge/refutation.

I want to think that Darwin's evolution provides comfort for my thoughts, but it is retarded in many ways. We can impeove the concept but not when it is put on the plain of "immaculate conception"
jjw

"I want to think that Darwin's evolution provides comfort for my thoughts, but it is retarded in many ways. We can impeove the concept but not when it is put on the plain of "immaculate conception""

I'm unable to interpret this.

I was suggesting that Darwin's theory is offered much in the same way that religion is. It is beyound reproach and to disagree invites wrath.
ID is just another example of a poorly chosen basis for a belief. There are many, some on the WEB, that find fault with Darwin. I am hard pressed to understand his view as an explanation for everything we find here on Earth. My point was that I would like to think Darwin was right but I can not do it blindly. No argument here.
jjw

I think it "invites wrath" because the people disagreeing with it almost invariably do so out of ignorance. Most of the people who argue against it, in my experience, are not interested in learning about it, but to denigrate it through specious arguments and mischaracterization. Their true goal is to eliminate the branches of science that might cast doubt on literal interpretations of ancient creation stories.

Evolution isn't an explanation for everything. It's only an explanation for the diversity of species that exist and have existed on this planet.

"Most of the people who argue against it, in my experience, are not interested in learning about it, but to denigrate it through specious arguments and mischaracterization."

You've nailed it. There are idiots in every group. There are plenty of stupid people who just happen to believe in evolution. Some of these stupid people might blindly attack anyone who disagrees with evolution.

But the VAST majority of the criticism of anti-evolutionists is not directed at their disagreement. Dissenters are not lambasted by the scientific community for dissenting or for questioning. They're lambasted because they usually make idiotic assertions that demonstrate they haven't done the least bit of real homework on the subject.