Not a single post, but a series of posts making a cogent point
Message 84Message 94Message 106Message 108Message 113
in
Biological Evidence Against Intelligent Design
Even more impressive, as he is arguing a position for it's logical value and not advocating that ID is valid.
Message 108: We could also say that the "jump" between corn and transgenic Bt corn has been shown to not be a jump insurmountable to evolution, based on the same set of evidence used to make the demonstrations you suggest; yet, we know that Bt corn was perpetrated by a team of intelligent designers.
...
The point is simply that Intelligent Design is innately an unsupportable and irrefutable concept, regardless of how it is constructed. There are simply too many variables and unknowns about the nature of design for us to list things that can be meaningfully considered evidence for or against design.
Message 113:
I'm not advocating anything. I don't think ID has any real logical merit, don't really find it appealing, and don't care to support it. But, I think the
approach being advocated by the OP is flawed and impotent in tackling ID, and should never have been proposed.
Enjoy.
™ Version 4.2
