The reigning philosophy of science is methodological naturalism, which requires that scientists explain all natural phenomena in terms of naturalistic causes. If a scientist thinks the evidence for some biological or natural entity points to an intelligent cause, the possibility is dismissed as unscientific by definition, and the scientist is charged with employing a “God of the gaps” argument in which God is invoked to plug up gaps in our knowledge.
I’ve always found this line of thinking interesting. Can you imagine if this principle was applied to the non-biological world? What caused Stonehenge? “People made it,” you say. Oh no! You have broken the rules of science. This is a physical entity, and thus it must be explained in terms of naturalistic causes. “But,” you say, “it has all the elements of design. The arrangement of parts is both complex and specified.” But this is just the appearance of design, not real design. While we may not know the natural process by which the pyramids were created, scientists are working on that. We cannot give up on science by appealing to some unknown “designers.” To do so is to employ a people of the gaps argument.
Thinking to Believe 