[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.

[Coyoteman]

...the most straightforward testimonials in favor of ID that could possibly be made.

Testimonials are not evidence, and certainly not scientific evidence.

Testimonials are not necessarily even accurate.

If you want to do science, bring evidence.

[allmendream]

Only if I.D. was synonymous with the idea that the universe was designed. I think such is also the case, but I don’t believe what I.D. goes on to claim, which is that the biological innovation necessary for common descent requires the intervention of the ‘designer’ to guide the process. Newton and Kelvin didn’t invoke divine intervention in their calculations, they were doing Science. I.D. is invoking ‘god of the gaps’ but needs to also invent the gap.

[disrgr]

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.

The fact that you resort to "straightforward testimonials in favor of ID", when asked for scientific evidence for ID, rather explains your perplexity, don't you think?