Hi. Mind if I get in on this too? I don't have time to respond to the entire
thread, but I'll just add two things.
----------
> Since the argument from design *still* hasn't gotten off the ground, this
> does not seem like much of a threat, some how. We're all still *waiting* for
> you folks to come up with a scientifically testable theory of ID that hasn't
> already been refuted by the evidence.
I would like to know exactly which parts of evolutionary theory are
testable.
> My general challenge still stands: Suppose your theory is true. Then, what
> would have to be different were it *not* to be true? That is, suppose there
> were no designer, and then specify how things would then *have* to be
> different now as a result of a lack of this designer.
I suggest that in the absence of a designer (and maintainer) that the
entropy of living systems would increase, rather than complexity and order
increasing together.