While admitting that, as is the case with any hypothesis/theory, there are debatable and problematic areas of mystery, I go with the wholistic corroborative quantity argument for intelligent design, each and all of which would be required for explanation of the observed data.
As with healthcare, focusing on symptoms alone is not very effective for lasting health. One can argue for some positive isolated good evidence for just about any origins viewpoint.
The most convincing aspect of ID creationism is the
quantity of evidences for ID,
all of which are needful to bring about what is observed in the cosmos and upon earth, some examples as follows:
1. The precise position of the sun, moon and earth so far as distance, size, temperature, lightrays et al.
2. All of the needful properties of planet earth's atmosphere.
3. Harmonious balance required for ecobalance in oxygen/hydrogen et al relative to survival of plants and animals, the discharge of one becoming the needful life sustaining inhalant of the other.
4. Complexity of billions of organisms, most of which are ecologically in balance for sustenance of the
whole.
5. The mathmatical improbabilities of the original biogenesis of life itself as well as the ability to progress/evolve in the early stages of life relative to entropy and 2LoT without a designer would be argument in favor of ID creationism.
6. Evidence of ID so far as fulfilled Biblical prophecy, the religious mindset of all cultures of mankind throughout history, explanations for the phenomena observed in human cultures, relative to the male/female relationships, reproduction, male dominance (so far as brute strength/family headship/size/et al)
7. The properties of planet earth itself as to properties, core, chemical makeup, all aspects of water, polarity, electrolysis, rotation, orbit, gravity, properties of soil, et al.
There are many more, but since this thread pertains to honing in on our best argument the above are examples for my best argument which would be corroborative quantity perse.
In order for this message not to draw off topic, I suggest that responses pertain to my best argument, being
quantity of needful corroborating evidences for ID, all wholistically supportive to ID creationism.
One may pick any one of the above items and cite arguments for and against in attempting to divide and conquer but as with evolutionists, we creationists have quite a significant arsenal of good corroborative evidences which give us good reason to remain entrenched, if you will, into our mindset. For that reason, imo, evolutionists often are too condescending toward us for tenaciously holding to IDist hypotheses.
Edited by Buzsaw, : Missed a spelling error in review
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.
™ Version 4.2