[Gondring]

I recommend people read the whole article so they can see all of the errors in it!

And some is just plain silly logical fallacies and hopes that people don't think when reading. For example, I wonder if the author doesn't believe that engineers used trial and error during their "intelligent design" of the robot, and if they think that no non-working prototypes are sitting around the marketplace proves that no non-working prototypes could have been made and failed.

[GodGunsGuts]

Seeing how the technology of life far surpasses anything that humans are capable of (or even capable of understanding at this point), I doubt you would find very many IDers who would agree with your analogy to human-level trial and error.

[nomorelurker]

Gonna stay out of the Evolution debate but found this an interesting article on human running.

All in all with the exception of horses, human males (sorry ladies) can out run anything on land. Not always short bursts but for the most part given some terrain or distance humans win. Can’t beat a bear or big feline at 30 yards but at a quarter mile the bear has no chance. 10 or 12 men in shape in concert can wear down any other animal on the planet. Even canines will stop sooner to rest than a human.
\
Take 12 men, some dogs, a few horses, and some crude spears and even TREX has no chance.

[count-your-change]

I read the whole article. What are the errors that you see?