[PatrickHenry]

Your Designer is limited to the kind of thing evolution can do and the platypus is no exception.

Observe Southhack's approach, which I'm weary of pointing out to him: "We can now do some designing, so this is therefore proof (or at least powerful evidence) of ID." Consider how, in the long dreary history of supernaturalism, the alleged "proof" of supernatural creation was the opposite -- that is, we can't possibly do such things, therefore they are a miracle, therefore Zeus (or whatever) rules the sky.

Now, sensing that the game is about to change, because it won't be long before we can produce a self-replicator in the lab, which removes their long-cherished mystery, the supernaturalists are scrambling to change the game. The new line of "reasoning" is the exact opposite of what it has been in the past. Now, they chant: "If we can make designs, this is proof (or at least evidence) of ID. Thus ID is a serious scientific theory." Heads the swamis win; tails the swamis win. Their superstition is invincible.

[Plato says: "Vade's right; I am no exception."]

[VadeRetro]

Very good point. The other side has a spin for everything. That's easy when you have a bullet-proof delusional system rather than a theory.

That link I posted in 337 also shows that Plato does have a family history after all, going back maybe 100 million years. It's rather gappy, but there are fossils enough to show that any "special creation" of platypuses was one heck of a long time back. (Let's say it would have been about when Gondwonaland started breaking up.)

[Southack]

"Observe Southhack's approach ... Now, sensing that the game is about to change, because it won't be long before we can produce a self-replicator in the lab, which removes their long-cherished mystery, the supernaturalists are scrambling to change the game. The new line of "reasoning" is the exact opposite of what it has been in the past. Now, they chant: "If we can make designs, this is proof (or at least evidence) of ID. Thus ID is a serious scientific theory."

Two problems with your rant:
1. I've never said the opposite of what I've been posting on this thread, so there is no "scrambling to change the game." You'll have to deal with my points, including the MATH in Post #310, on their own merits, as I've got no past history that would call into doubt my sincerity of my current postings.
2. If Man can design things and program DNA, then this really is evidence of Intelligent Design.

[Vercingetorix]

"Their superstition is invincible." -- PatrickHenry

Southack's Top Ten Rules for maintaining the Invincible Superstition:

1) Pretend not to comprehend any relevant information.
2) Compartmentalize all facts to prevent comparison.
3) Anything that can be easily understood by someone with a third grade education is automatically nonsense.
4) No lie is too big if it supports the superstition.
5) Keep the mind free of any knowledge of the basic subject matter so as not to lose sight of the superstition.
6) Take everything out of context.
7) The rules of logic and evidence were made to be broken.
8) Never discuss randomness and selection together.
9) Never doubt the superstition.
10) When in doubt, see rule #9.