Luskin said Miller inaccurately characterized intelligent design as a concept that focuses on what evolution doesn't explain. Luskin said intelligent design stands on its own as an explanation of life and the origins of species.
It is untrue that intelligent design requires a supernatural being. Intelligent design doesnÂt suggest who a designer is, Luskin said.
Contrary to Miller's comments, Luskin said, intelligent design is a testable theory.
Michael Behe, a professor of biological sciences at Lehigh University, has written about how protein and protein interactions could not evolve. His article was printed in 2004 in Protein Science, a publication of the Protein Society, Luskin said.
So let's see if I've got this right:
It is wrong to suggest that Intelligent design merely focuses on what evolution doesn't explain. ID stands on it's own, and makes testable predictions. This can be clearly seen if you look at Behe's paper, which argued that evolution can't explain the evolution of protein interactions.
Wow. I guess even a hint of anything that remotely begins to faintly resemble something that might once have been briefly exposed to intellectual honesty is just too much to ask from these guys.