I don't think so. Same questions. I'm just waiting for ID to supply me with some positive answers--what, how, when, where. The other thing is that science is willing to answer "I don't know" to some things, and I'm willing to accept that answer. ID tends to be uncomfortable with that and to insist on their explanation, even in the absence of positive evidence. It doesn't impress me.
[[I don’t think so. Same questions. I’m just waiting for ID to supply me with some positive answers—]]
No- you’re partial- There’s several positive answers- IC and discontinuity- both of which are biological probabilities- whereas Macroevoltuion and common descent are not- both of those violate biological science as well as statistical computations- thsse aren;t minor points, yet you treat them as meaningless