Evidence for Intelligent Design-is there any?

First of all hello to you all here on the EvC forum, been lurking here for a while and finally decided to post, hope to learn a lot here.Note to reader: points made by Beretta treated as though they were true for the sake of this topic This isn't evidence FOR ID now is it, it just means that textbook writers are slow to pick up the vast majority of evidence that has accumulated since Darwin. It doesn't even mean Evolution's not true, since it depends on far more then just these so called "icons".

Lucy,To eleborate a bit on Rick's comments, it could litterally be anything. You think of it, it could've happened.This is the problem when speculating about things that have no evidence, anything's possible.

How many times do we have to tell you.Anything at all, that's what else is there. Literally, it could've been anything, a car driving in the street, this pc I'm typing on, and I could go on and on. I could make up a story about all these things and how they created Life, the Universe and Everything. With no evidence to back it up, I'm free to say whatever I damn well feel like saying.Is it true? It might be true, as long as Evolution is false. At least that's the point you're trying to make here.So you see, even if Evolution's not true, this does not mean by default ID is. Like many have said so many times before, the possibilities are endless. How do we know which possibility to go for? For that we look at the POSITIVE evidence FOR that position, and when it holds up, that's the one we go with.Hope this helps

Not true, look at a snowflake.Bereretta, please present some POSITVIE evidence FOR ID. So far, all you've done is critisize Evolution. And becuase it would be off topic to react to those criticisms in this thread, I'm not. However a new thread about the "Icons" would certainly atract my attention.

.Edited by Huntard, : No reason given.Edited by Huntard, : percy corrected himself

I write: Lucy writes: Wich is exactly the point I'm making. Those things I mentioned, when given the right context, ALL could've created Life, the Universe and Everything.If I was convinced Evolution isn't true, then how would you convince me that it is indeed ID that offers the right solution, instead of say.... The "theory" of talking, yet very unintelligent bat winged pigeons?ABE: and then Since there is "evidence" for creation everywhere, does that mean it's not real science as you said just one paragraph earlier?But fine, let's deal with cold hard facts. Point me to a "cold hard fact" that undeniably points to ID as the correct theory. Cold hard facts should not be able to be interpretted in more than one way should they? So if you point out these facts, I think you will indeed have won your case, I await with great anticipation.Edited by Huntard, : added a bit to the messageEdited by Huntard, : spellings

I'll see if I can cook something up this week, of course if you do it sooner, no problem for me.

Beretta.I'm not an Evolutionist, I didn't even study Biololgy beyond the higschool level. I dont care if the theory of Evolution is true or not, I only care where the facts take me.So, if you say something looks designed, fine ok, some of these things are indeed very intricate. However how do we know for sure? How can we tell the difference between "actual" and "apparent" design, I think finding a way to determine which is which is very important in this thread.

I asked this quetion sometime earlier, but I think I should ask it again.Say your arguments convinced me now that evolution isn't true, what evidence can you point to that will undeniably show "the hand of the designer" at work. In other words, Where is the POSITIVE evidence FOR design. No more arguments against evoltuion, we're passed that stage, convince me ID is the way to go instead of unintelligent guitar wielding metal thrashers. Yes that last bit was silly, but in the absence of any evidence at all, I can claim they did it by hitting the right riffs on their Universe, Life and Everything creating guitars by sheer chance.Edited by Huntard, : Spellings

I'm not trying to make them unbelive, they can do whatever they please as far as they don't bother me with it. However, when they claim to have evidence that we are designed, and then don't show any, they are lying, and lying's not ok with their god and all that.I just want to show them that believeing in their particular brand of god does not make it necesarry to lie about the world around you.

---

I hunt for the truth

Makng evidence no longer valid? How would one go about doing that?His story book? I don't think percy is using a story book, I think he's using a SCIENCED book, and other possibilities CAN happen, it's just that we find NO evidence for them, so we don't talk about them in a scientific way. If we understand it, it's not superior to us. And like pointed out before to you, DNA doesn't work like software. I am open to accepting ANY and ALL evidence, not my fault you don't provide any. I found Percy's answer quite good actually, and, again, as said before, Life's not technology. Superior technology is technology we wouldn't understand.Since the rest of your post is a nice little ad hmoinem attack against Percy, I won't bother answering it.

So the number 3 comes up a lot of times. And this is proof god created our world and everything that exists how exactly?

---

I hunt for the truth