MrHambre:
quote:
I think you need to read Darwin's Black Box again, as I do quasi-religiously every summer. Evidence of poor design, redundant design, or the absence of design are not sufficient cause to abandon a design perspective. You're assuming that the Designer (whether God, other deities, cartoonists, extraterrestrials, or what have you) intended the design to be optimal, and your basis for that assumption is invalid. It would be just as valid (or moreso, since Behe said so) to assume that the Designer intended the design to be poor, redundant, or to have the appearance of having evolved. This is what makes Design such a powerful hypothesis. Useful? Works for me.
Thus, there could be nothing that could falsify the "Intelligent Design" hypothesis, because it can easily incorporate something like Philip Gosse's
Omphalos hypothesis of created appearance.
quote:
Remember, only IDC proponents are qualified to make judgments concerning how a Designer would design. ...
Says who?
™ Version 4.2
