I am always being asked to give my evidence for intelligent design.However, no matter what I say, the same question comes up as if I never had anything to offer.
For example:
bluescat48 writes:
Then show the evidence. If evidence can be found then it would change ID from pseudoscience
My reply was as follows and Granny Magda's answer to that follows thereafter:
Beretta writes:
Why is it that nobody has ever seen me mention any evidence, no matter how many times I mention various lines of evidence?
Lets see, how about
-the fossils, sudden appearance and general stasis
-the Cambrian explosion -sudden appearance of practically all phyla
-the information rich genetic code
-the inability of ”science’ to explain how the information got there
-the lack of transitional forms
-the continually rehashed icons of evolution that despite being a collection of old worn, some fraudulent, others thoroughly discredited, most out of date somehow never seem to change. One would think with all the vast network of science, something more convincing would come along, but no.
-mutational load, absence of beneficial mutations being demonstrated, surplus of examples of negative effects of mutation
-the specified complexity of living things.
Granny Magda writes:
None of the arguments you list is positive evidence for ID. Not one.
Each of the items you list is an argument against evolution.
I contend that my examples are evidence for intelligent design.
™ Version 4.2