Intelligent Design or unthinking blasphemy?

Perfection or imperfection by who's definition? Idiot by who's definition? The term "Blaming" assumes that one has the knowledge and ability to declare unequivocally that the process is flawed. I know of no human that is privy to such omnipotent enlightenment.

We have the definitions of others to consider. I do not share your assesment of the topics question. This is simply your assertion. One done without any knowledge of wether or not it is design or if it is design what the intended outcome of the design is. Without knowledge of the intended outcome one cannot assess the preformance of the design.
We as humans have yet to design things that ballance. We design based on preformance we desire, never considering the fallout. Usually ignorant of the true impact what we do will have. In assessing such questions we must recognize our limitations.

Yes, You have an opinion but what is your point?

So all humans share this view? I do not. This is your personal opinion.So yes, you have an opinion, what is your point?

Who says it has to be a God? That is a matter of faith and another subject. Evolution does not work? Pffft!
This is simply your point of view. One I do not share.

Show me evidence for this assertion that is not opinion. That is a good place to start. A long way to go but a relavant starting point. However, to prove to the faithful that an omnipotent source capable of more than we can ever comprehend did not design the whole shebang is a none starter.

I have not expressed my opinion.
ID to prove God is faith. What if we remove the assumtion of God from ID and simply ask if there is evidence of design? Others share your belief, and?

You claimed that the design was flawed.
It depends upon the answer you seek.How is it that evolution contradicts intelligent design?
Where does one eliminate or exclude the other?As I understand it evolution can say nothing of God. It does not address this question. God is a matter of faith.
Now wether or not something is intelligently designed seems like a reasonable endeavor to me. One that does not require faith in God.

It is only blasphemy if you assume the design is flawed. What constitutes a flaw is simply a matter of opinion. One persons flaw is anothers perfection. Explain this more clearly. Suggestion is your implication. What is the indication of err? Assuming God is omnipotent there would be no need for trial and error. In case you hadn't looked at the title it is characterised by your above statement.

Again, death is a flaw to you. It is your opinion. This is your personal feeling and has nothing to do with science. I do not need others to give me my view. As I said, ID to further ones belief in God is faith. That is clear. But I do not see anything wrong with pursuing the simple question of wether or not the complexity of life systems indicates intellignence. Again this is your assertion. Show me evidence that is not opinion.
This is your view. Your belief based on what you think should be.

It is your belief there is no reason. That is your opinion.
We learn nothing when stagnant. Pleasure is nothing without pain. You never know how good or valuable something truly is until you lose it. We see things in different ways when experiencing what you interpret as "flaws". We learn.

This is your assertion. A position of belief that death is a flaw. You have no basis for this assertion other than your opinion. In a practicle sense life on this planet would be quite difficult if nothing died. In a philosophical/spiritual sense we would not understand the value of life.

Yeah, you have an opinion, so do I We learn when dealing with our "imperfections" All lifes tough lessons teach us things.
Apparently the tough part is pointless to you. It is not to me. As I was, to hold yourself acountable to your own definitions.I have pointed out to you that you have an opinion. I recognise it. You are entitled to it. I happen not to share the philosophy.

Your conclusion is your opinion based on assumption. Back it up.
Back it up with evidence that is not anothers opinion. I am no less entitled to my opinion than you are yours. I determine for myself in this venue what is warranted. As do you. If you choose not to recognise my right that is your choice. It does not affect me.
I have chosen. In case you hadn't looked at the title it is characterised by your above statement.You defined the topic as not being just another avenue for pseudo-philosophical blatherings. I pointed out that the topic was none other.

Who has taken the time to look into the question?
Has there been a study?
Seems rather odd to simply dismiss the idea.