[betty boop]

A belief in an intelligent design, in an original creator of that design and an ever-present overseer of that design is more reasonable to some of us than believing in an uncaused cause and in continuing random mutations leading to progress.

In Aristotle, "uncaused cause" goes by other names, too — e.g., prime mover, first cause. (God certainly qualifies as an uncaused cause Himself.) Without a first cause, we are stuck with the problem of a universal infinite regression....

But I suspect this is not what LeGrande means by uncaused cause. Who knows? He rejects all causes, period. I do not see how such a position can be reconciled with science.

[LeGrande]

In Aristotle, "uncaused cause" goes by other names, too

Aristotle's 'causes' as I previous listed are "final > efficient > material > formal"

Sorry but I don't see "uncaused cause" there or any scientific methodology. Mixing philosophy and science just makes you confused Betty. Science is not philosophy, nor is it necessarily 'logical' or 'reasonable' in the ordinary sense of the words.