Is John Mercer- Molecular Biologist- an Ignorant Coward?

-
The cowardly losers on Peaceful Science are clueless. They ask things about ID when they know there are very few there who grasp the concept. For example, John Mercer asks:

Edgar, why doesn’t anyone in the ID movement have an ID hypothesis that makes testable predictions?

Hey John, why don't you and yours lead by example by showing us the testable hypotheses and predictions borne from blind, mindless and purposeless processes? Why the obvious double-standard?

But I digress- ID predicts that living organisms are not reducible to materialistic processes. That also means there is more to living organisms than what meets the eye- immaterial information that runs life.

ID is based on three premises and the inference that follows (DeWolf et al., Darwinism, Design and Public Education, pg. 92):

1) High information content (or specified complexity) and irreducible complexity constitute strong indicators or hallmarks of (past) intelligent design.

2) Biological systems have a high information content (or specified complexity) and utilize subsystems that manifest irreducible complexity.

3) Naturalistic mechanisms or undirected causes do not suffice to explain the origin of information (specified complexity) or irreducible complexity.

4) Therefore, intelligent design constitutes the best explanations for the origin of information and irreducible complexity in biological systems.

And guess what? That is more than evolution by means of blind, mindless and purposeless processes can muster