[Lucky Dog]

Let me see if I get your drift. You admit that selection is a powerful shaping tool, but in its unattended mode it looks icky.

Let me apologize. I think I failed to make myself clear. I have never postulated that selection as a part of evolution had to be “attended.” What I have done is pointed out that evolution’s basic postulate of mutation and “natural selection” based upon “survival of the fittest” does not support the concept of “random selection.” If this fits the definition of icky, perhaps it is. Nonetheless, that work is not mine.

Well take a look around. Look, for example, at the bacterial flagellum, the poster child of design. It's main "purpose" seems to be killing infants and children.

No argument from me.

ID really frames the question like this… No one can prove you wrong.

I think if you will review my posts, you will find that I mentioned intelligent design in relation to humans “selecting” breeding stock to modify naturally occurring organisms into something that would not otherwise have come to exist through “natural selection.” I have not advocated intelligent design otherwise in our discussions at all.

What I have done is pose questions concerning evolution originally attempting to determine if a statistical correlation exists relating mutation rate, natural selection pressures and the emergence of new species. Outside of one poster referring me to some mathematical work by R. A. Fischer, I have no luck in even getting a firm definition of terms, let alone, unambiguous, measurable quantities.

[js1138]

I have no luck in even getting a firm definition of terms, let alone, unambiguous, measurable quantities.

We have a couple of guys who can do that if you take their class at the graduate level.

[Coyoteman]

What I have done is pose questions concerning evolution originally attempting to determine if a statistical correlation exists relating mutation rate, natural selection pressures and the emergence of new species. Outside of one poster referring me to some mathematical work by R. A. Fischer, I have no luck in even getting a firm definition of terms, let alone, unambiguous, measurable quantities.

You are trying to mathematically model the real world.

Easy! All you need to do is accurately identify the variables, and their correct interrelationships. (The rest is left as an exercise for the student.)

ps. If you can't do this, perhaps it is more a reflection on you and your method than the real world itself. Your failures are certainly not evidence that the theory of evolution is incorrect.