[allmendream]

There is nothing wrong with the lens of people who have color blindness - the lens enables the eye to focus. It is the photosensitive “cones” at the back of the eye that detect color that they have a problem with.

You say ID explains EVERYTHING - I reply that anything that purports to explain everything, in fact, explains nothing.

I described to you the supposed “gap” that God left in reality that HE, according to ID and their ideas on biology (what is under discussion here, not geology, astronomy, physics, etc), has to fill.

That is why ID is a “god of the gaps” argument.

It proposes a weak and shoddy god who left gaping holes in reality.

Proposing a natural force to explain natural phenomena is science.

Proposing a supernatural force to explain natural phenomena is not and never will be science.

Proposing natural forces to explain natural phenomena is testable and replicable and has led to all the technological and scientific advancements of the last few centuries.

Proposing supernatural forces to explain natural phenomena is an intellectual dead end that leads nowhere and creates nothing of any value.

[circlecity]

"You say ID explains EVERYTHING"

I never said that at all. Please show me where I said that. But you did say, "Proposing supernatural forces to explain natural phenomena is an intellectual dead end that leads nowhere and creates nothing of any value." Which is quite interesting in that your "science" proposes a supernatural "big bang" singularity to explain the natural world. Thus, you empiricists have no problem incorporating the supernatural when it serves your ends but rejecting it when there's the possibility of a moral component. The ultimate hypocrisy of empirical science, which by its own definition cannot quantify empiricism itself.