Dinosaurs: a question for ID advocates

Hello, new member here. Not here to insult anyone, just interested in how people think on these topics. My question is fairly straightforward...What do intelligent design advocates make of dinosaurs? Is it their view that each group of dinosaurs (define 'group' whichever way you wish) was created individually, with no ancestors? Or that an intelligent agent played some part in their development?If so, then what do id advocates believe dinosaurs were 'for'? Surely an intelligent agent smart enough to create individual dinosaurs would be able to foresee their eventual demise?Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Did the upper case letters.

Dinosaurs were a failed experiment? This would imply serious lack of foresight on the part of the designer - which would also conflict with the idea of the designer being omniscient.I'm also not sure in what sense dinosaurs could 'go wrong'. If a designer created them to hunt, feed, rear their offspring etc, and they do just that, then in what sense could they be deficient? Did their populations get out of control? An omniscient designer would surely foresee that, and also know from the outset they would ultimately be destroyed. Do we conclude that the designer is not omniscient?So there is no dominant view amongst ID folk when it comes to the chronology of living things? What about the people on this forum? Do you accept established chronologies (for example fish>amphibians>reptiles>etc), only stating that a designer stepped in to help the process along, or do you invoke special acts of creation? In either case, it still leaves the same question hanging: why would a designer create dinosaurs? What were they 'for'?Edited by emr, : No reason given.

The 'mysterious ways' defence is almost always the equivalent of saying 'we just don't know.' Nothing wrong with saying, 'don't know', but I'm wondering if anyone can come up with a positive argument for the existence of dinosaurs (and for that matter, all other extinct life forms) when they played no part in the lineage that led up to the existence of humans.Edited by emr, : No reason given.

In a word: Christians. ID is a Christian movement after all, and the Christian god is supposed to be omniscient. If IDers did not believe the designer to be an omniscient deity, the whole movement would never have got started in the first place. Indeed. That's what you get for being omniscient. I refer back to the previous point: surely an omniscient designer would know in advance that this change would be implemented. This is all very interesting. Thanks for the info. I don't think that kind of rationalisation has ever helped humanity to understand the fabric of the universe. Whose entertainment? Ours?Edited by emr, : No reason given.

Surely that can't be true, since evolution by natural selection can be observed happening in a short space of time, albeit on a small scale - that's impossible to deny. If they are arguing something along the lines of 'species are immutable' then they have to ask the question: why would a designer create all these species that are now extinct? Very revealing. This just reiterates the point that ID is a uniquely Christian movement, with no space for any other 'designer' than the Christian god.Edited by emr, : No reason given.

Or if every other religious denomination (plus pantheists, deists and those who invoke alien intervention) adopted ID theory, I suspect the original ID movement would have to re-define itself as ID Christian, while another would define itself as ID Hindu, another ID Sikh etc... then the whole of science and theology would be at war. Holy crap.Edited by emr, : No reason given.