> Tom Moore asks:
>
> << Are you really going to argue that they have no purpose unless they say
> something like "Hi, Tom, how's tricks?">>
>
> Hmm, we were comparing the diffence between an intelligent design, and a
> random design. Suffice to say most people can discern a difference between the
> rock patterns we were talking about. Common sense is often a wonderful
> attribute to have in these controversies.
>
Yes, it is and you just feel into my trap, Jim. Go to my hometome in
Ohio, got to the man-made lakes outside of town, and go to the randomly
distributed rocks on the beach, bring along the engineers etc. and tell
them to their face that's not intelligent design.
And again, if you believe that God created the earth, are you really
honestly going to claim that there wasn't intelligent design behind the
beach?
> << Because you can't show me a single example of something that is not
> designed. >>
>
> I just showed you. The rocks on the beach. What intelligence designed them? I
> suspect this is a matter of sloppy (random?) terms. "Purpose" and "Design"
> are being used in different ways...sort of the way evolutionists use the word
> "evolution."
>
Gee, and I just shows that they could be even by humans. So, you have a
problem, unless you are saying ID in a purely naturalistic world, you
might have a point. But I doubt if you would risk a naturalistic
hypothesis like that.
> This makes it doubly hard to achieve clarity. I'll have to abandon the effort
> for the moment, even though Tom and I have obviously been intelligently
> designed for this discussion.
>
Really? By which naturalistic mechanism? Oh, that's right, you don't
believe in naturalism, so you still haven't shown me something that can't
be ID.
Tom