The evidence for design and a designer

This experiment has already been performed: but no-one has published the results. Then why do some things fall over? And man can look at a tiger and recognize that it came from two other tigers unintelligently making out.And both these feats of recognition come from prior knowledge --- we know how computers are made and how tigers are made. It is not clear that an ideal reasoner, without this sort of knowledge, could infer these things merely by abstract contemplation of a computer and a tiger.So how are we meant to decide whether the universe is more like a computer or a tiger? Of course, if we could find a label on the bottom of the universe saying "Made In Taiwan", this would be a useful indication ...Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

But in fact cdesign proponentists never say how and refuse to discuss it. You are wrong. I have never heard anyone say "random designation of interation" about anything. And a third class of people, who, unlike the first, actually exist, attribute it to the laws of nature --- which requires no faith whatsoever.

Your meaning is obscure. I have often looked past my nose. In fact, it is impossible for me to look in any other direction.

There are indeed. For example there's real science --- which does not say that "all things randomly came together"; which does not endorse the screwing of domesticated African equids; and which is not a bunch of crazy crap that you made up in your head. Ah, irony.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

And science makes more sense than either of those options.

How have you eliminated the other alternatives?

Well, no. Some things happen by chance, some by intelligent direction, and some fall in neither set. Granted, the two sets are disjoint, but I don't see why you assume that they're complementary.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

For example, I do not attribute the six-fold symmetry of snowflakes to design by Jack Frost; but nor do I attribute it to one vast coincidence.Rather, it happens because that's what water does --- it is the result of neither chance nor design, but necessity.

That came out a bit ... metaphysical.I hardly know what to make of statements like this: