There continues to be debate about whether both evolution theory and intelligent design theory are science. More discussion about the scientific method might be helpful to your readers.
The foundation of science, the scientific method, starts with a statement that predicts an outcome called a hypothesis. For example, evolutionary theory might posit: “Changes in organisms result from an evolutionary process.” Intelligent design theory might posit: “Differences among organisms result from intelligent design.”
These hypotheses are tested using data that can be measured and obtained by one of the following methods: 1) conducting an experiment, or 2) observing new, naturally occurring data. This second method is often ignored in statistics textbooks, but we could not address theories about the galaxies, geological formations, ancient civilizations and evolutionary or creationist events without this part of the scientific method. Each method requires the collection of data with clear descriptions of the methodology, so that others can duplicate the research.
If the data support the hypothesis, then the research is accepted as supporting the underlying theory. If not, doubt is cast on the theory. A key point is that the data must have the potential for either being consistent or inconsistent with the scientific hypothesis.
We know many discoveries have been made that are consistent with the theory of evolution. It is possible that data could be found that would be inconsistent with the theory of evolution, and doubt would be cast on that theory. Although theory of intelligent design researchers have presented data they believe is consistent with their theory, they have not described what discoveries or data might cast doubt on their theory.
Thus, evolutionary theory is a matter of science. But until intelligent design theory uses the scientific method instead of simply attacking evolutionary theory, it is not a matter of science.