[Bombardier]

Just to point out who these folks are:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/whoare.htm

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/aims.htm

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/design.htm

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/diagenda.html

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/wedge.html

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/doctor.htm


These are lengthy, but also very informative.

[lasereye]

Looking at that 3rd link, he makes an argument so logically falacious there's no need to pay any attention to anything he says:

The odds of any human being being struck by lightning are enormously improbable, yet every year at least a dozen people are killed in the United States by lightning bolts. Have they all been struck down by God? Is the chance of any particular person being struck by lightning "too improbable" to have happened by chance?

The odds of a dozen people in the U.S. as a whole being struck by lightning is not enormously improbable. You don't apply the probability of a single person being hit to the likelihood of anyone in the entire country being hit. That's how probabilities are calculated. It's the same reason it's not incredible that someone in the entire group of players hits the lottery. There's millions of chances in the aggregate group.

[lasereye]

Even more preposterous is his example disproving how a mousetrap is irreducibly complex, in which he has someone wielding a hammer as the first evolutionary phase of the trap - trying to demonstrate that an evolving mousetrap without all the parts could be fully functional from the get go. The person wielding the hammer is not part of the evolving trap but is an outside agent. His example actually demonstrated the opposite of what he was trying to prove. What a joke.