It is when the basis of the theory is a non-natural designer.
Again, the distinction between natural and non-natural is superficial, arbitrary, philosophical, and scientifically useless. Intelligent design can, and has been directly observed. Organized matter performing specific functions is a hallmark of the same. The universe is replete with examples, dynamic development of new biological pathways notwithstanding.
"New biological pathways do not falsify intelligent design."
Yes, they do. All complex biochemical structures are held to be, as predicted by ID, IC and thus *cannot* evolve and *cannot* have precursors as such complex biochemical structures, *according* to CSI *must* have been designed by an intelligent agency. That we observe the precursors and the evolution entirely invalidates ID.
"he falsification of intelligent design resides in the potential for particle matter to diffuse into chaos and thus become wholly unintelligible."
I already talked about quantum mechanics. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, etc shows how particle matter *is* an unintelligible mess, with particles occupying two places at once, with non-casuality, etc.
"That's hasn't happened yet. Tomorrow may be another story."
It happens all the time in quantum mechanics.
"Again, the distinction between natural and non-natural is superficial, arbitrary, philosophical, and scientifically useless."
No, it ensures objectivity in science.
"Intelligent design can, and has been directly observed."
No, it hasn't been. That structures evolve, have evolutionary precursors, and that CSI and IC are non-existent as I have *continually* discussed falsifies ID.
"Organized matter performing specific functions is a hallmark of the same."
How many times are you going to repeat the same argument? I just showed how CSI was non-existent.
"The universe is replete with examples, dynamic development of new biological pathways notwithstanding."
Not really.