Unfortunately, the poll is flawed. There has to be an 'I don't know' or 'undecided' response.
As far as can man create life, I believe it's all ready been done. Will it be a completely new unique DNA? I don't know enough about it to express an opinion, although knowing 'humans', I would not be surprised.
The term 'intelligent design' is typically used by religious conservatives to inject their religious beliefs into science, as in let's not use our minds to figure out our place in the universe, let's just rely on this old musty scripture. That IS their purpose, but they completely miss the point. Even if science figures out most/all of the mechanics, and physical laws of the universe, we still don't know why physics are the way there are. There are theories of the multi-verse with multiple universes with different physical laws. Yes, all of this could be the work of a grand deity, but religious conservatives are afraid that knowledge somehow diminishes the concept of God. I'd argue while it might diminish the traditional, biblical view of God, as in the God the Bible/Quran describes, but in no way can it threaten the idea of an all powerful being, and spirituality, simply because there is too much we don't know. But the fear is still there. The Christian views are threatened by science, because it will diminish the
details of their belief system. We don't know enough to identify God and it reminds me of Atheists who say that when you die, it's all over. Sure if you limit your view to a dead decaying physical body, it may seem like it's over, but do we really know enough to make that decision? I know I don't.
BTW, this is completely different than the premise you (Accountable) are using to describe 'intelligent design'. Religious conservatives would never allow what man does in the lab to be described as ID. Nor would they go for the idea that ancient aliens designed us, something like the story line of Prometheus. I see it as a possibility as good as any other and I still allow for the idea of some kind of supreme being and a parallel spiritual existence, but I can't say I believe it. I just don't know enough and we don't know enough to teach it as science. It would be better suited for a philosophy course. Just let the scientists keep doing what they are doing... figuring things out based on the scientific method, not philosophy, not guessing, and not conjecture (although I believe conjecture aids the scientific method).
