Intelligent Design's faulty logic

Intelligent Design proponents beliefs frustrate me when they try to force our public school children to consider science a subject that can be done based on invalid logic.

The IDers logic is summed up in the Latin phrase

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

That translates to: This happened after that therefore that caused this.

When IDers say that the universe is so complex it must have been intelligently designed, they are using Post Hoc logic.

That same line of logic proves that frogs are the offspring of mud. That is, the frogs showed up after the mud so the mud caused the frogs. Sorry, boys and girls, that just isn't scientific.

Intelligent Design is not a theory. It is a conclusion based on invalid logic. That's what happens when you try to do science based on conclusions that must be taken on faith.

For Intelligent Design to be a scientific theory it must follow proven scientific method:

1. The ID conclusion must be approached as a Hypothesis.
2. The Hypothesis must be proven using proofs that hold up to real-world facts, processes and events. The Hypothesis will then have become a Theory.
   
3. The Theory must be published along with the proofs, evidence and methods used.
4. The Theory must be reviewed by the scientific community for accuracy of facts, evidence, and validity of methods.
5. If the proof is accepted by the scientific community (in general), only then can ID be accepted as science.