Replies

Thank you for your kind reply.

Truly this particular case was more about the supporters of the intelligent design movement than the movement itself much less the intelligent design hypothesis.

I still believe that the ID movement is more about backdooring a way into the Creation story versus an alternative scientifically based hypothisis. It was a Trojan Horse from all things people of faith.

likewise, the intelligent design hypothesis must stand or fall on its own merits - regardless of who is supporting it

Someday it will. And maybe not as we understand it. For now, it simply is saying somethings are unexplainable without a Creators hand. Unfortunately, there's not a lot of science behind that.

Thank you for your reply!

That is your opinion - and sadly, there are quite a few who truly believe that evolution is the main power play for atheism as an ideology - along with all its political agenda.

IMHO, we need to lay aside all of our presuppositions and look at the intelligent design hypothesis on its merits.

For now, it simply is saying somethings are unexplainable without a Creators hand. Unfortunately, there's not a lot of science behind that.

To the contrary, the intelligent design hypothesis says "that certain features of the universe and life are best explained by intelligent cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection".

An "intelligent cause" could be either a phenomenon (such as an emergent property of self-organizing complexity or fractal intelligence) or an agent (such as God, collective consciousness, aliens, Gaia, etc...)

Something as simple as animals choosing their mates could be established as the "intelligent cause" for "certain features".

IOW, it doesn't matter whether the "intelligent cause" was a phenomenon or an agent. And it doesn't cover "all features" - i.e. the hypothesis is not a theory of origins, just like the theory of evolution is not a theory of origins.