Logical Proof of Existence of a Divine Creator, Why Atheism is Not Logically Sound

This quotation alone shows the depth of your iganorance about that which you claim to have cast-iron arguments against! If you are going to argue against any scientific theory then it would help if you knew exactly what constitutes a theory in science.As has been pointed out at EvC countless times, the scientific use of the word theory is not equivalent to the layman's use of the term. In science an operating theory basically refers to a group of hypotheses that are both well supported with evidence and useful for making accurate predictions. All science is based on theories.Both electromagnetism and gravitation are theories and the phenomena that they seek to explain are a fact.Evolution is, therefore, both a theory and a fact - is has a hypothesis based on evidence and it can be observed in reality. This is not what evolution claims at all. Abiogenesis forms a separate, though clearly related, field.

Good point!

Rather than trade insults let's just cut to the chase, tell me the hypotheses that exist for the following:-1. Who did the design?
2. What are the processes involved in this type of design?
3. What hard physical evidence demonstrates this design process? (I'm not talking about an argument from incredulity that talks vaguely about odds and randomness, rather, I want to know where I can observe the creator's fingerprints.)Now, when I say "evidence" I do not mean criticism of the Theory of Evolution. By "evidence" I mean original observations that underpin a design hypothesis that does not rely on the ToE.I await your reply.

That's all very nice YP, but do you have any answers to my questions in message 57?