And, as an idle aside, although in a much less methodical way than I intend to do so in our framework debate, I've here demonstrated the error that Alamo-Girl was expounding earlier: That any proposed solution to any given objection to the modern synthesis theory of genetic evolution is "intelligent design"...
I'm content to allow non-randomness explanations (as speculative possibilities) from whatever source, philosophy, science, etc. It just seems clear to me that the randomness piece of evolution makes it untenable. I'm content with the evaluation that the current evolutionary understanding is inadequate.
I know the direction to search is away from randomness-infected evolutionary theory. The best guesses lie in some non-randomness direction.
ID is promising in that it is a non-randomness direction. Add to my faith honest research and I'm content.