Intelligent Design as a scientific theory?

[Rev. Rye]

A Theory is, by definition, is "A supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained." Specifically, testable statements that explain phoenomena.

Regardless of the conclusions that Intelligent Design reaches (which tend to be either cribbed from mainstream science or flat-out wrong) or even its falsifiability, it goes out of its way to avoid actually explaining anything. It was developed as a way to introduce creationism (which absolutely never explains exactly what happens when God "Creates" something, except maybe when Young Earthers use it to explain how the Flood made all the canyons and the fossil record, conveniently obscuring its own existence like something out of an episode of Phineas and Ferb) back into mainstream science by removing any specifics about the designer, more or less removing both any coherent substance to it and any explanatory power it may have had. Unless they actually get the balls to explain anything beyond "magic man done it" or the sort of evolutionary bromides they think will keep scientists from seeing it for what it is, it cannot even fulfill the basic requirements of descriptive prose, let alone a theory.