[general_re]

I'm not sure how helpful that explanation will be to anyone, though - even Dembski avoids that sort of thing. After all, implicit in the very idea of the design inference is the notion that some things are designed, and some things aren't. If everything is designed, what good is a design inference that can only tell us that some things were designed? Or even worse, if everything is designed, what do we need a design inference for in the first place?

[Dimensio]

Actually, that's a common problem with the argument that design is inherent in the universe (an ID argument that I've heard more than once). When asked for examples of something that is "not designed" so that we may use it as a reference for comparsion, they either balk or throw up "theoretical" examples that lack any useful detail and, because they are only theoretical, have absolutely no useful value as evidence.