[allmendream]

None of those statements were regarding Scientific evidence. I myself feel that the symmetry of the universe speaks of the obviousness of a creator, but I do not confuse my feelings about predictable phenomena and forces with actual data about how those laws and forces came about. Moreover, I.D. is a retreat from the path of these noble men of Science who sought to explain how the universe was laid out UTILIZING THOSE PREDICTABLE PHENOMENA AND FORCES, not assumed that it was Incompetently Designed and that ‘the designer’ had to fill in the cracks by hand or push things in the desired direction utilizing celestial powers of unknown and unmeasurable quality.

That is why Incompetent Design is not Science and is anti-Scientific in its goals, outlook, and philosophy.

[RussP]

“None of those statements were regarding Scientific evidence.”

Baloney. These men were some of the greatest scientists of all time, and they were commenting on what they had learned from their studies of nature. If that is not “scientific evidence,” then “scientific evidence” does not exist.

And what I find interesting is that, in the case of Newton and Kelvin, they made those statements before we had much of an understanding of the amazing complexity of every living cell. Just imagine how much more convinced they would be of ID if they knew about that.

I must admit that I am perplexed by people like you. Whenever I post these quotes, I get people who, through some sort of mental acrobatics that must be painful, manage to reject those quotes as the most straightforward testimonials in favor of ID that could possibly be made.