<< Purposeless is subjective anyway, and people design random elements
into things all the time - i.e. random number generators. So, give me an
example of what you're considering "random, purposeless design" that
can't be designed that way by an intelligent designer.>>
Hmmm, if "purposeless" is "subjective anyway," then you have defeated any
possibility of getting an answer to your query, haven't you? How can we ever
get an objective answer? I don't think we can operate with your initial
premise.
Anyway, let's assume intelligent beings can disceren purposelessness. An
example of "random design" would be rocks on a beach. Design with a purpose
would be those rocks shaped into a message like, "Hi, Tom, how's tricks?"
ID theory is extrapolative. It takes such evidences and widens the picture.
This mode of argument, it seems to me, has been given new life by the likes of
Mike Behe.
Finally, your argument may prove too much. It may be impossible to find
evidence of ultimate purposelessness because we are so obviously designed by
intelligence.
Interesting thought.
Jim