[Donald Meaker]

The difference between the two is as follows:

Evolution would propose that there would be different variations, which would be successful or not, and the more successful aspects would be more populous.

Intelligent design would suggest that G-d would not make any unsuccessful designs, such as Mammoths, or dinosaurs.

Evolution would suggest blind fish in caves. Intelligent design: would G-d design that? What do you think?

Evolution would suggest several intermediate forms of humanity between primitive apes and modern man. Since these have been found (some 10 so far) this is pretty good predicting.

Intelligent design: what would that predict: G-d created intermediate forms, (for practice?) and then wiped them out?

[goldstategop]

There's no evidence for ID. It would presume the intelligent designer got all the details correct. As Dennett points out, the eye, which ID proponents cite as proof of the complexity of design, has a flaw: the way the optic nerve runs down a cone to the brain. If something happens to it, blindness is the result. Of course no true designer would build anything that imperfect. If you care to examine nature, imperfection seems to be built into life. There are advantages to evolutionary mistakes. There are none from ID itself.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)