Why are we so bad at this?

quote:

---

You probably even have the audacity to teach that the tiny
Colorado River formed the Grand Canyon over a span of
millions of years.

---

That’s because it was. As the canyon itself makes clear. Why else would it have the shape of a river course - including meanders? Have a look at Horseshoe Bend![quote] It should be clear to everyone that the Canyon was formed
from the runoff of a global flood, with water escaping from the
large water basin North and East of the canyon. [quote] In reality that is obviously false. You wouldn’t get a canyon that looks like a mature river course out of that!

quote:

---

Does your random collection of brain cells tell you why Earth's
other rivers did not do the same. The Nile, Mississippi,
Amazon, and other great rivers should have even larger
canyons.

---

It is geological uplift that causes a river to cut a deep canyon. No uplift, no canyon.

Let me point out the problem with this argument:

quote:

---

If you have all the identifying features of sophisticated intelligent design, then you have something intelligently designed. (This is the law of identity, NOT circularity, most laymen conflate the two)

---

The Law of Identity requires that the two identical statements have exactly the same meaning. Therefore, for this to be the Law of Identity it must be the case that having “all the identifying features of sophisticated intelligent design” is all that being “intelligently designed” means. Therefore if something had those features but was not designed by an intelligence it would still be “intelligently designed” - according to your claim.I think we may rightly reject this as an equivocation. Unless it can be shown that only an intelligent designer can produce something having “all the identifying features of sophisticated intelligent design” then that is an assumption - and arguably one that begs the question.