So what you're describing is intelligent design, as opposed to evolution via natural selection.
2) There's no big distinction that I am aware of between ID beginning-of-life and ID constantly-tinkering; unlike the case with Darwinian Evolutionary theory.
I know from these crevo threads that many adherents to Darwin's theory explicitly disclaim any application of that theory to the question of how life originated from abiotic matter. The theory is only about how forms of life change into new forms.
I know from these crevo threads that many adherents to Darwin's theory explicitly disclaim any application of that theory to the question of how life originated from abiotic matter. The theory is only about how forms of life change into new forms.
Be that as it may, we are discussing the boundaries of ID, not Darwinian evolutionary theory.
So what you're describing is intelligent design, as opposed to evolution via natural selection.
Um, yea.... You understand there's a distinction between "naturalistic" and Darwinian evolutionary theory, right? If the thetan lizard people, should they prove to exist, and were responsible for guiding, initiating, or messing with our evolution that would still provide a naturalistic, not a super-natural explanation--which would not obviate Darwinian theory; it would only show that evolution was not confined to the planet earth, as we had originally thought. The thetan lizard people had to come from somewhere, and, being naturalistic, would be subject to investigation by science, including, most likely, evolutionary biology. Hence my original prediction that got your motor going: that naturalistic ID will probably be swallowed by Darwinian Evolutionary theory without much distortion, should ID prove to hold water.