Intelligent Design Disclaimer
There is a familiar tail-chasing exercise that occurs whenever a supporter of “Intelligent Design” is asked to provide theoretical specifics, data or particulars of just about any sort regarding the nature, methods, and purposes of their designer. The ID proponent maneuvers in circles trying to avoid direct contact with these questions, while his itinerant anti-ID opponent anxiously dogs his steps begging for, sometimes demanding, clarification.
It occurred to me that all of this could be avoided with a handy reference that allows both parties to skip past this awkward portion of the discussion and proceed directly to name-calling (my favorite part).
To this end I humbly suggest,
The Intelligent Design Disclaimer*
[ * Intelligent Design Theory does not warrant or assume any legal, scientific, or philosophical liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any attributes, characteristics or quantifications applied to the intelligent designer/designers. ID Theory does not endorse or recommend any applications of natural, empirical observation to the aforementioned designer/s. The views of authors expressing an opinion about intelligent design, whether pro or con, do not necessarily state or reflect those of the promoters of IDT, and they may not be used for theory definition or explication purposes.
It is not the intention of IDT to provide specific scientific data, but rather to provide users with concepts that better bolster their preconceived notions and affirm their right to adopt and maintain empirically unsound opinions. All persons reproducing or redistributing these concepts are expected to adhere to the terms and constraints invoked by the promoters of ID, namely that such material is to be used for infiltration and disruption of information distribution entities such as education, research, criticism, and public media.
Should you experience problems in your personal application of Intelligent Design please understand there is, at the moment, no technical (or evidential) support division. Operators are not standing by. Consultation with your local theologian may help you feel more comfortable with ID (this is not, however, to be construed as a warrant that ID will then become useful, or even operable), but as per contractual stipulations this consultation shall not be revealed publicly.
Finally, if and when it is convenient, please locate a biologist, physicist, or any scientist, and remind them vigorously that IDT is science. If they request empirical testimony refer them to this disclaimer. Should they then suggest this presents an inherent contradiction, throw your hands up in the air and exclaim "We're being excluded from the process!" (All Rights Reserved)
Intelligent Design Theory makes no claims as to the performance of this construct regarding displacement of methodological naturalism. As always, individual differences may result in divergent levels of success (oops, did we say that?).]