Why assume that humans are the intended result?
Most ID proponents I know would trot out Genesis 1:27 if I brought this up. It's a good point IMO, but assumption of literal bible truth trumps all, apparently.
What I'd like to know is, if a designer exists, why are there so many alleged "leftovers" from our evolutionary ancestors? For instance, if we didn't evolve from an ape-like precursor, why do humans possess:
*erector pili: "goose bump muscles" used to puff out hair in most mammals, including hominids
*body hair: seems to serve no function in humans vs. other mammals
*little toe: used by apes for grasping limbs, yet another useless holdover in humans
*coccyx: all that's left of a once ambidextrous tail
I could go on and on...
These anatomical "
non sequiturs", to me, would seem to require that ID proponents
at least admit the possibility that the designer is either 1. a good chain-yanker
or 2. so incredibly advanced and mysterious that we, as lowly humans, could never begin to ascertain his intent.
Pretty weak choices, if you ask me. I wonder which of the two the Intelligent Design Movement would pick.
Have a good one.
™ Version 4.2