This belongs in ID.
The "design inference" has gotten a lot of traffic at EvC recently. The ID movement claims that where you see apparent design there must have been a designer.
My view is that we have two examples of design types and design processes which produce them.
1) Human (known intelligent) Design.
These designs strive to be as simple and clearly understandable as is possible for the situation. They use standard parts in many cases. They borrow from one another across whole classes of product. (spark plugs in cars and lawn mowers).
2) Evolutionary Algorithms Design (known to be unintelligent).
These designs can be weirdly incomprehensible. They may have totally non-functional parts in them. Parts only arise from what was there before not from what is used anywhere else.
My contention is that we can make a very clear separation between the two classes of outcomes. Biological organisms look like the product of the second "design" process.
ABE
On and Off Topic
I'd like to see this include a discussion of design and the characteristics of it.
This is about the "design" of biological organisms. It is not about the origin of life or the laws of nature. They are the background in which we are working.
Edited by NosyNed, : added a bit
™ Version 4.2