And so what? I didn't say the outcome had to be different, just that the distinction between the burned down forest being a design or not was determined, at least in part, by the intention or lack thereof.
Again, I don't think there is anything controversial in what I'm saying. Check any dictionary. Here's one.
Also, I was not specifically addressing ID vs. evolution, just your contention that the outcome of an evolutionary process must necessarily be undesigned. If I took your view, I'd have to say the the algorithms and electronic circuits produced by evolutionary programming techniques are not designed, but clearly they are designed even if the details of the programs or circuits are not.
If the outcome isn't any different from what would have happened anyway, then it's pretty meaningless to talk about it being a design.
If I took your view, I'd have to say the the algorithms and electronic circuits produced by evolutionary programming techniques are not designed, but clearly they are designed even if the details of the programs or circuits are not.
Except that you are determining the parameters for survival. Beyond that, you're not designing the algorithms and circuits, unless you're still engaging in artificial selection along the way, as is done when breeding domesticated animals.