You're neither God nor the owner of the website. You don't get to set limits on the discussion. There are non-theists who posit a non theistic intelligent designer. But that's neither here nor there. You said evoultion,small e, is a fact. I agree. I said intelligent design, small id, is a fact. Do you deny this?
Because that's usually the case.
Usually doesn't cover the whole set of views on intelligent design. Theistic ID theory does but there are others that don't. One prominent Evolutionist even posits the design of this universe in the garage of Joe Blow somewhere in the multiverse.
BTW, if we were, calling it a scientific "fact" is insane, since how do you detect the difference between a random occurance and something God did?
Insanity happens.
Evolution happens, allele frequency is changed. Monsanto does the same thing with bioengineering, ie: intelligent design.
Homo sapiens hasn't been around all that long and yet there are folks changing allele frequency as we speak. You really think it is that far fetched in a 15 billion year old universe that somewhere, something else can also do the same?
Now, just for honesty's sake, I admit to being a creationist. I believe God created the universe and all that's in it. But being the species "Creationist Dreadist" doesn't preclude an interest in science. I have faith in how the big picture started but I admit to a curiosity as to all the mechanisms used to get from exploding grapefruits to the present.
Well, I do try to set limits on what I personally discuss, because there are lots of things I know nothing about. :)
I said intelligent design, small id, is a fact. Do you deny this?
Define it precisely and I'll give you an answer. Honestly, I don't really know what you mean by it anymore.
As to the rest of your comment, I tend to make no arguments for or against (theistic?) intelligent design from a philosophical point of view. I kind of like the basement creation idea.
My personal belief (although cosmically irrelevant) is that God or something like it did make it possible for us to be here today, by whatever means.
However, science has a very strict and limited scope, which is how organized advancements in the understanding of the observable world can be made. Forcing into this scope various philosophical, unlogical, unobservable tenets will do nothing but prevent us from learning more about the world.
I have faith in how the big picture started but I admit to a curiosity as to all the mechanisms used to get from exploding grapefruits to the present.
Me too.