“Inteligint Designe” Intelligent Design shirt

This shirt is a jab at the non-scientific and uneducated nature of the Intelligent Design agenda. The best part about this shirt is that a lot of the people who support Intelligent Design don't have much book learnin' anyway, so they won't ever realize it's misspelled and get offended!

Plus, if someone has never heard of the Intelligent Design agenda the shirt is still funny, because anytime you misspell 'Intelligent' you've got instant irony.

The shirt is foolproof!

Intelligent Design (ID)

ID in a nutshell:

Biological organisms are so complex there is no WAY they came about by accident. Therefore, there has to be an all-powerful Intelligent Designer behind life on earth.

It’s not a new argument. Aristotle and Plato used it, countless philosophers throughout history used it, and in 1802 William Paley put a shiny spin on it with the “watchmaker analogy,” saying that if you see a watch by the side of the road, you can safely assume that a watchmaker somewhere made it.

Let's face it - it's a neat argument.

The problem is that it’s a PHILOSOPHICAL argument, but Intelligent Design advocates are trying to tell everyone it’s a SCIENTIFIC one. And THAT royally pisses scientists off, because the ID advocates do no research, propose no experiments, publish no papers in credible peer-reviewed journals, and completely ignore the scientific method that everybody else in the world is expected to follow. They just misuse scientific terms to argue their philosophy/religion, and are lobbying to get their ideas taught to kids in science class.

Intelligent Design is simply the Creationist agenda (the literal interpretation of Genesis where God made everything in six days) with the word “Designer” instead of “Creator” or “God.” Proponents like it better than the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection (minor genetic variances over a long time with advantageous modifications passed on to the subsequent generations), because evolution doesn’t jive event-by-event with Genesis chapter one.

Designing a "Theory"

For any theory, hypothesis or conjecture to be considered scientific, it must be:

  • Consistent
  • Parsimonious (Not a lot of wacky guesses to make it work – i.e. it follows Occam's Razor)
  • Useful (describes and explains observed phenomena, and can be used predictively)
  • Empirically testable and falsifiable (if you can’t prove it true, you should be able to prove it’s false)
  • Based on multiple observations, often in the form of controlled, repeated experiments
  • Correctable and dynamic (modified in the light of observations that do not support it)
  • Progressive (refines previous theories)
  • Provisional or tentative (is open to experimental checking, and does not assert certainty)

Any theory should meet most, and ideally all, of these criteria (the fewer criteria are met, the less scientific it is).

So why can't Intelligent Design be "Science"? Because it lacks consistency, violates the principle of parsimony, is not scientifically useful, is not falsifiable, is not empirically testable, and is not correctable, dynamic, tentative or progressive.

By contrast, the theory of evolution has been modified extensively over the years based on results of experimentation, and in order to mesh with all the new things that we discover about life on our planet. Sure, there are a few (very few) holes in our knowledge, but the theory as-is accounts for 99.9% of the evidence. And for that other .1% there are tons of papers written every year by clever scientists working on understanding something new and exciting.

Can We Find Signs of Design?

(So far... no.)

ID advocates say that biological organisms work so frickin’ well that they contain “signs of intelligence.” It's because when some Intelligent Designer creates something, you can see the effects of intelligence on his/it’s work – even if you can’t directly perceive the Intelligent Designer.

In the 20 years since Intelligent Design was first formulated, no rigorous test that can identify these effects has yet been proposed. No articles supporting intelligent design have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, nor has intelligent design been the subject of scientific research or testing.


Intelligent Design versus Evolution: On the one hand, you've got things that a few people think the Bible says. But on the other hand, you've got...


If you’d like to read a more informative point-counterpoint article where the biggest ID-advocates write their most compelling arguments, only to have qualified scientist give them an ideological and scientific smackdown, check this out.

Just don’t forget who sent you there, and be sure to come back here afterwards and buy a clever shirt!

This shirt shows that you have strong enough faith to support Intelligent Design, because, let's face it, "Evolution by Natural Selection" is only a theory*.

*A sound, scientifically rigorous theory solidly supported by facts and evidence gathered during over 150 years of meticulous research and testing in biology, anthropology, geology, medicine, oceanography, paleontology, botany, genetics, molecular biology, computer modeling, and just about every other branch of so-called "Science."



Current stock levels

Shopping Cart

Your shopping cart is empty

SmartTorso is closed.

Hello! This is Jim (the guy in the pictures). If you came here to buy a shirt, sorry to disappoint. This site no longer accepts orders, but you can still browse around and look at the designs, jokes, or email me to say hello.

Current Good Deal !

buy 2, get free shipping

Buy 3 get 1 free (+ free shipping)

Be a friend of ST

pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic pic