[GourmetDan]

"Dawkins didn’t allow for a designer for life in the universe. He said that if you allow for extraterrestrial design for life on earth, then that designer would have had to have a natural origin. The Hallmark of the ID movement is mking either unsupported statements and calling them facts."

Dude, an extraterrestrial designer does not have to have a natural origin. That's only true if you assume that reality is limited to naturalism and that is an unsupported statement that cannot honestly be called a fact.

Your rendition of Dawkins statement is making unsupported statements and calling them facts. But evos never do that, do they? Only ID'ers, huh?

[Soliton]

Dude, an extraterrestrial designer does not have to have a natural origin.

Of course not, that's why ID is just creationism in disguise.

[Soliton]

Your rendition of Dawkins statement is making unsupported statements and calling them facts. But evos never do that, do they? Only ID'ers, huh?

In the film "Expelled" (reviewed below), Richard Dawkins is asked how intelligent design might be identified. He replies that an alien civilization might have designed life on earth and left a signature somewhere in the biosphere (my paraphrase). But, the alien designers would themselves have to have been evolved through Darwinian mechanisms.

http://theconstructivecurmudgeon.blogspot.com/2008/04/richard-dawkins-and-darwinian.html