It is fairly apparent where the name calling originates and what the name is. I've been called the same more than once, typically in cases where no sound argument against my position is to be found. The dogmatic evolutionist cannot, and will not, respond substantively to my posts. They are loathe to do so. They either flee or soil their verbal trousers.
Nevertheless, because their position is not entirely one of fantasy and not entirely without merit from the standpoint of reasonable discourse, I am willing to grant the name calling despite their inability to present some cause other than intelligent design as explicative of the ubiquitous presence of organized matter that performs specific functions.
What do they propose scientifically as responsible for the lack of chaos in this intelligible universe? If you want to hear the sound of crickets, just ask.
"Nevertheless, because their position is not entirely one of fantasy and not entirely without merit from the standpoint of reasonable discourse, I am willing to grant the name calling despite their inability to present some cause other than intelligent design as explicative of the ubiquitous presence of organized matter that performs specific functions." [Emphasis mine]
Yet you refuse to define 'organized matter' and specify the functions this matter performs. You also avoid explaining how self organizing systems that perform specific functions are different than your 'organized matter'.
I spent a great deal of time not all that long ago trying to get you to tell me how to determine if a given chunk of matter is organized or not, and what kind of function is 'specific'. I never did get an answer.
After watching the Chugabrew ball randomly bounce off the walls, all the while carefully avoiding my questions, I decided conversing with you is no different than conversing with a Turing testbot.