Theodoric wrote:
But they can't do that. That would expose it for what it truly is
On some level, I agree with you; it's highly unlikely that they will try. On the other hand, it might be really interesting to see them honestly do so.
In the few places I've discussed this stuff, the conversations quickly go beyond the expertise of the average anonymous debate geek (myself included). For example, wouldn't it be interesting to try to define "higher intelligence"? If we're supposed to be seeing evidence that creation was created by someone/something far surpassing our intellect, what exactly can we point to? How would we identify alien intelligence, let alone divine intelligence?
There must be disciplines which have already worked on questions like this. When NASA sent Voyager out with that gold record containing images, sounds and messages from humanity, they must have given some thought to what kinds of tools/understanding a peer or higher level of intelligence might have access to.
ID proponents should actually try to point to very specific things that represent the hallmark of a creator God. Irreducible complexity was a nice try, but it failed.
edit: sorry, this is definitely off-topic.
Edited by Whateverman, : No reason given.