Dinosaur tail found preserved in amber!

[RoadRunner79]

Of course.... I wouldn't expect the anti-intelligence crowd to read the article or respond to the points made.   This was posted for others

What would be the purpose in responding to points made by people who insist that intelligent design is scientific? ID is neither testable falsifiable nor predictive. It is not a scientific stance, but  a philosophical one.  Credibility nil.

Boru

How did you come to that conclusion?   Tests are preformed, and often in an attempt to falsify the theory. It also makes predictions, such as those verified in the ENCODE project and that convergence will be found to be more common.
I may also point out, that saying it is unfalsifiable is in conflict with a number of people, who seem to believe that it is false.  As well, this would mean that aspects believed under the umbrella of evolution which conflict with I.D. are also unfalsifiable.

I would suggest that you check these things out for yourself, and don't just take my word for it.