Evolution, schmevolution...or why ID needs to step away from the science lab

So The Daily Show with Jon Stewart's been having a hilarious take on the evolution 'debate' (and I use the term loosely, because I don't think there's enough credible evidence by Intelligent Design (ID) proponents to warrant a debate) with a series of segments from Back in Black to Ed Helm's magical mystery evolution tour.

Tonight, Jon upped it a notch by trying (in the loosest of terms) a panel format, inviting an evolution proponent, an ID proponent and...metaphysical theorist?!? (definitely scraping the bottom of the barrel for the third guest).

Obviously, nothing's going to get resolved. What interested and irked me was the evolution proponent advocating that alternative theories like ID can be taught in science classes.

NO! WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!

Intelligent Design or any other theories that have NO scientific evidence (the evidence that 'science doesn't know everything' and 'things are complex; therefore, it couldn't have evolved' doesn't count) should not be taught in a science class. Teach all the uncertainties you want. Science hasn't solved or figured out everything. I don't dispute that. It doesn't, however, gravitate to the response that "therefore, God or some higher being must be involved." Anytime that a higher being is invoked, it goes straight to a comparative religion class or creation myths, not biology.

By inserting God/higher being/creator/etc. into a scientific process ends it. Why try to discover the reasons behind something we don't understand when obviously God/allfather/Zeus/etc. is THE reason. Therefore, we don't need to reason...BRILLIANT!

Believing that God started the Big Bang is fine. That's faith. However, that being lesson one in an astronomy class is not. Therefore, Believe in all the higher powers you want, but God has no place in the scientific method (notice that I'm not talking about the scientist, who can be the most faithful adherent to any religion he/she wishes).