Who won this evolution/ID debate?

1) Perhaps, to a greater or lesser degree, there's a persistent nagging notion in the minds of intelligent people that no matter how complicated explanations for the complex universe get, totally natural and random processes do not make sense.2) As with the debate which Percy cited, what is BS is debatable. Edited by Buzsaw, : revise phrase

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

I've never been no kind of a preacher in my church and have never stated that I was. There, Tazmanian Devil. Divy the goods as to the truth of your allegement and you'll finally have a bonafide Buz lie.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

For Taz and anyone else who may need clarification of my message 9, what I meant to convey in the following statement relative to totally was that no intelligence applied, that is, all processes which were totally absent of ID. ID proponents do accept that some random and/or natural processes do effect a measure of micro-evolution within the perameter of given species, for example, as I undersand it.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.