[the_doc]

With regard to the basketball and ice crystal, I would say that it is transcendentally obvious that these things are designed. The fact that others will not agree with me won't deter me from asserting that. The Creator agrees with me.

[general_re]

With regard to the basketball and ice crystal, I would say that it is transcendentally obvious that these things are designed.

Certainly a valid position to stake out. However, the design inference states that there is a logical process we may employ in order to definitively prove design - it is that process that is being put to the test, not so much the notion that things are or are not designed.

[CCWoody]

I agree. I would say that evolution as a theory is already dead. What is funny in a way is that evolutionists attempt to explain what they don't know whereas Design inference deals with what we already know.

[PatrickHenry]

With regard to the basketball and ice crystal, I would say that it is transcendentally obvious that these things are designed. The fact that others will not agree with me won't deter me from asserting that. The Creator agrees with me.

I fear that I lack the sensory apparatus needed to perceive things transcendentally. For those who may be similarly disadvantaged, could you explain in a little more detail how it is that you can determine design? For example, even if a man were blind, I could explain to him how to distinguish between a real and an artificial plant. I could do this by showing him how to use his sense of touch, smell, and taste for this purpose. It's not the same thing as seeing, but he could nevertheless learn to tell the difference, and he could then agree with me in distinguishing real plants from fake ones. Surely, your transdendental perception of design can likewise be detected, however crudely, by the standard senses to which most of us are limited. So could you give us some more information about how it is that you detect design?