[allmendream]

I did answer your idiotic assertion that speaking of dogs as an example of how selective pressure can work means that I give any credence to the Incompetent Design (ID) ‘god of the gaps’ argument. I told you that Darwin himself used NUMEROUS examples of human selective breeding to show the power that NATURAL selection could have upon the traits of a species.

Just because selection can be used by intelligent agents to shape a species into desirable or beneficial forms; does not mean in any way shape or form that selective pressure upon genetic variation is not necessary and sufficient to explain the common descent of species without the direct intervention of a “designer” (wink wink).

You need to get serious and post an actual link to the contention that you stated, denied you said, admitted you said, reiterated... and now claim that you do not need to source.

[tongass kid]

The concept of intelligent design is not limited genetics. Your example of bicycles and airplanes are significant examples of intelligent design. The bicycle and airplane are a product of intelligent design. Intelligent people have been given credit for designing those products. In order for you to refute the concept of intelligent design you must demonstrate that the bicycle and airplane came from no where and there was no intelligent designer of the the products. To date you have not understood ID unless you actually do believe that airplanes and bicycles appeared from no where with no designer involved. Additionally you will need to agree that the if there was a designer the designer was not intelligent. Your reference to dog breeding essentially suffers because without intelligent design those breeds of dogs would never occur by natural selection. If you have taken a genetics fruit fly lab you would clearly understand what happens to dogs and fruit flies that have undergone intelligent design and allowed to return to natural selection. If you do not enjoy the history of participating in a fruit fly lab it easy to get the point, observe the neighbor dogs off spring when intelligent design is no longer imposed on the breeding process. This is only an attempt to further your understand of ID and is not a personal attack. If you wish to continue the discussion it would be agreeable if you were to drop the name calling (”idiotic”) and personal attracts. I believe it is ok on these forms to disagree but not to be disagreeable. If these ground rules are not to you liking then we should do other things with our time.