Stonehenge and ID

[b] [QUOTE] Dembski derived the Design Explanatory Filter:
start with an event- E
Does E have a High Probability of occurring?
if yes it is attributed to regularity.
If No, we ask does E have an intermediate probability of occurring?
if Yes we can attribute it to chance.
If No we ask does E have a Small Probability of occurring AND is it specified?
If Yes we attribute it to Design.
if No we attribute it to chance.
[/b][/QUOTE]Surely it is obvious to anyone who studies this filter that it is completely arbitrary and establishes nothing. Vastly improbable events happen all the time - do they all need a designer? It's vastly improbable that I will win the lottery - but somebody wins it every time it's drawn. To say "it's improbable, but it occurred, so it must have been designed" is ludicrous.And to hark back to the earlier Stonehenge argument...we can look at Stonehenge and infer design because we can look elsewhere and see what the 'natural' (ie., undesigned) state of rocks like that is. They don't form structures like Stonehenge without ID. The same cannot be said for any examination of life. We have nowhere to look that is similar to the earth, but has no life and say "See? WithOUT design, no life forms. But life formed here...so it must have been designed." The Stonehenge analogy is flawed if for no other reason. If we one day discover a hundred other planets with everything very like earth, but no life, it might become reasonable to claim ID in the life on earth. Until then, it's purely wishful thinking, since you have no basis at all to say that life could not have arisen by chance.