> <<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.>>
>
> Sure. Give me their phone numbers.
Look the up yourself, the town is Bucyrus. No particular order at all to
the rocks, but they were 100% intentionally placed there, just like the
rocks that you claimed spelled out a message.
>
> Ouch, it's painful chewing off my own leg. But anything for truth!
>
You can give up on ID any time you want to Jim. I don't think you get it
do you. It takes more than saying "Gee, it looks designed" to for it to
be really designed. That's all you can give me, isn't it? Weak
sarcastic remarks. People are great at pattern recoginition - the next
time you see a cloud that looks like something, are you going to say ID?
No one here since I've been reading this listserve has provided any
criteria _at all_ to tell if something is designed just by looking at
it. Now I have asked for any evidence _at all_ that could possibly go
against ID, even the tiniest little bit - no answer at all. Now I've got
you trying to tell me that "random design" doesn't equal "intelligent
design." Very interesting. It seems to me that you're saying that if it
doesn't look like design, it can't be intelligent design. Not limiting
the power of God to naturalism again are ya?
It seems to me you have absolutely no reasonable criteria you assessing
design. If you got it, state it and we can move on from there.
Tom