>>Bertvan: I should think anyone who didn't believe the laws of nature
accidentally
>>arrange themselves into logical relationships and patterns would believe
they
>>were designed. And since I never heard of any of design other than
>>intelligent design, I am an IDer.
Pim:
>So it's based merely on your belief. That does make you an ID'er. But ID can
also >be non-intelligent, see Elsberry's review of Dembski for instance.
Hi Pim, I'm familiar with Elsberry's arguments. Would you say
"non-intelligent" might be a definition of "stupid"?
Bertvan:>> I don't have any opinion about who or what did the designing.
Pim:>Indeed, it might as well have been 'mother nature' then.
Bertvan: If want to call your "designer" some vague entity named "mother nature", it
sounds ok to me. Bertvan
Fine, so now we have natural laws being designers.