Well, the point that people that understand the theory of evolution, 
instead of getting everything, including the name sometimes, wrong, is 
that nothing implies the "need" for a designer at this point. Sure, gaps 
exists, but most of them are in the minutiae, or involve stuff that 
evolution itself doesn't imply, state or talk about, like abiogenisis. 
And, even that just begs the question of, "What kind of designer 
couldn't just poof it all into existence, instead of setting up some 
basic life form, over which all evidence clearly suggests they would 
lose all ability to direct or control within the first hundred 
generations?

Such a designer would either have to be limited, non-omniscient, non-
omnipotent, etc., or something like the fragment of god that got hit by 
a satalite, in Futurama, and so good at it, that they set up every 
single tiny detail, all the while making it **absolutely** impossible to 
find any evidence that they where involved. And that just begs the 
question, "Why do that, then insist on making the species that resulted 
jump through stupid hoops of unfounded blind belief vs. testable 
disbelief, to get at whether or not you exist?" Its either a damn bad 
way to get followers and keep them, or something sadistic, like poking a 
small furry animal in a box with a stick, where all the animal knows is 
that something outside the box is stabbing them. Mind you, in this case, 
the designer can't even get that right, since the only evidence of 
outside interference is the human hubris that because "we" design 
things, something else had to design everything else, including the 
stuff that all evidence suggests designed "themselves", like rivers, 
canyons, mountains, etc. Its a silly argument really. "Gosh! Its true 
that the unbelievably complicated thing like the grand canyon kind of 
formed on its own, based on physical laws, but the eye.. Now that just 
***looks*** complex to me, never mind that, statistically, its fracking 
simplistic by comparison to the complex structure of one side canyon in 
the grand canyon!" Well, that would be the argument, if they where not 
completely blind to the fact that a side canyon "is" more complex than 
an eye, and doesn't just look like it too them because they don't 
understand it.

So.. Is there or isn't there? Who the heck knows. Do you need one for 
any of it to happen? Not as far as anyone can tell so far. Could that 
prove different later? Sure, but trying to compare that to ***any*** of 
the stupid definitions or descriptions these ID people, or creationists 
in general, think did it... is just absurd.

-- 
void main () {

    if version = "Vista" {
      call slow_by_half();
      call DRM_everything();
    }
    call functional_code();
  }
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message