You're quite welcome!!
Now, rest assured that I have carefully read your reply and in fact crafted a detailed response that I'm scrapping.
I don't do the scattershot, touchy-feely thing well. So, let's rewind.
What precisely are we debating?
So far as I can tell, we are debating two topics:
1) Whether panspermia is a version of "intelligent design"..
2) Whether "collective consciousness" is a version of "intelligent design"..
So, is this correct? That we're debating these two topics?
I'm unclear on whether we've added a third:
3) Whether evidence exists of an "intelligent designer"..
Are we also debating this?
And, is there anything else?
2) Whether "collective consciousness" is a version of "intelligent design"..
me: Thats a tall order for a reply post and has been addressed already on myriad threads. In a general category, I would call it geometric physics (dimensionality, forms, etc.). More specific to life v. non-life/death in nature: information (successful communication), autonomy, semiosis, complexity and intelligence. If you care to specify which area interests you the most, Ill be glad to gather up information and post it later this evening. I have to be gone this afternoon again.
It can be a wide-ranging conversation and most likely will result in a lot of links and excerpts posted to the thread, so if you do want to discuss it we can move things along better if you narrow in on the subjects of interest.