"WHO HAVE YET TO DEMONSTRATE THE SPONTANEOUS ORGANIZATION OF A PROTEIN"
You have yet to explain how the designer came to exist, the structure of the designer, the thought processes of the designer, the way the designer interacts with the universe and exactly which things the designer designed.
Yup,both are theories.One commands a monopoly and jealously guards it.Wonder why.
"WHO HAVE YET TO DEMONSTRATE THE SPONTANEOUS ORGANIZATION OF A PROTEIN"
"You have yet to explain how the designer came to exist, the structure of the designer, the thought processes of the designer, the way the designer interacts with the universe and exactly which things the designer designed. "
Both require a leap of faith.Darwinism is predicated on the first protein cell spontaneously inventing itself.A third rail they dare not touch.
I disagree. You need only prove that Darwins theory is false, untrue and impossible. Once that is accomplished and accepted we will probably go back to an updated pre Darwin teleology of some sort and look at Darwinism as an unfortunate but necessary detour in man's understanding of natural history.
Man's Knowledge is not necessarily linear, progressing in a straight line. Sometimes we take wrong turns, get lost, then make course corrections.
In the field of economics socialism was all the rage in the previous century. Now it's passe.
Evolution in my opinion was never strictly a science as we have come to understand the term. It has elements of what I call 'natural philosophy' embedded in it. It became an all consuming mantra that sought to answer all of life's most important questions. In other words 'it over reached'.