Its Backwards

A clearcut example of making a posteriori hypotheses to fit a foregone conclusion.

Here I was under the assumption that the scientific method first requires hypotheses, and then observations, and then tests, results-conclusions, and then more reproducible tests of those conclusions. Is it fair to frame the hypotheses to fit a set of known conclusions?

The site linked to here has a series of hypotheses that are set after the fact, in an attempt to show the predictive nature of ID. While not specifically related to symbiosis, I found this approach intriguing in that it seems to reverse the scientific method. And yet, the ID proponents can't understand why their ideas do not fit within the mainstream scientific community.