[BMCDA]

We just agreed that successive improvements to earlier designs is a sign that an object was designed by an imperfect designer (otherwise they wouldn't have to improve the design in the first place). But you're afraid to use this understanding when looking at the evolution of Man (whether by RM&NS or by successive tinkering by the Intelligent Designer).

Does a design which has so obviously been tinkered with constantly throughout its history shout out "I was designed by a perfect designer!", or "I was designed by an imperfect designer!"?

Ohh, that's no problem y'know. There is already an answer to your objections:

If a living system looks well designed, it's evidence for ID. If it looks poorly designed, that's just because we have no way of knowing what constitutes good and bad design.
Afterall, we can't tell that it's bad design because we have no way of knowing what the Designer really intends. But we do know that ID will revolutionize culture, society, and law, according to what the Designer intends.

[jennyp]

If a living system looks well designed, it's evidence for ID. If it looks poorly designed, that's just because we have no way of knowing what constitutes good and bad design. Afterall, we can't tell that it's bad design because we have no way of knowing what the Designer really intends. But we do know that ID will revolutionize culture, society, and law, according to what the Designer intends.

Darn it, they've got ALL the bases covered!