Is "under oath" supposed to mean something here? Perhaps that he isn't lying about what his opinion really is?
If we went to Mars and found a threaded metal bolt, it could be explained as a random natural phenomenon through the application of statistical possibilities, however slight.
(Monkey + Typewriter) X Time = Shakespeare
However, common sense says it can't happen.
You should never accept a statement by an evolutionist at face value. Their minds don’t work correctly and their statements are likewise false.
Behe actually testified that ID was falsifiable just as astrology had been falsified.
In an evo mind, that translates into the false statement that you saw.
So we found part of one of the crashed missions. Next!!!
Ironic. Imagine an evolutionist saying "so help me God".
Of course that begs the question, "Have we found one?" Common sense runs into reality.
An arch is a beautiful thing, mechanically strong and efficient, and removing any one part of it causes it to collapse. If I were so inclined I would say it was designed upon seeing one, yet we see such arches created by natural processes. My conclusion is that complexity is often in the eye of the beholder.
They had this monkey typing at the keyboard. In the first minute he rapidly typed:
“xeajiope3a=383^*&$jnklR3PO9(0[Ju90390[j3joi39[3JO’j’E34WRJO’EJ3430334KO’3KL;43L;’3’4KO’Q3240]AJK4L3;R40]4Qiu#jm#)_#;k3EJ”
The odds of him typing that sequence were about 1 in 400 billion! Yet it happened!