Intelligent design or Naturalism?

[David777]

As evidenced by a wave of recent books on the subject, there is a
growing uneasiness in the scientific community about the validity of
Darwinian evolution. Many scientists and philosophers are taking a
fresh look at evolution, and based on the latest evidence are raising
huge questions. Indeed, a hard look at the scientific data accumulated
since the time of Darwin in the late nineteenth century, is leading some
observers to conclude the following: The evidence for Darwinian evolution
is so fragmentary that it would not command any respect at all, if it were not
for the fact that the evolutionists have agreed in advance to exclude all thought
of intelligent design.

There are, it seems, two definitions of science. One is to look at the facts,
test the hypothesis, and see where it leads you—even if you don't like it.
This, of course, is the traditional definition. But many are now questioning
whether evolutionary dogma may have used a second definition
—to start with a definition of naturalism, and look only at the pieces of evidence
which fit that philosophy.

(From Faith Facts website)