Why ID is Useless

Cdesign proponentsists can't distinguish between "Who?" and "How?" Evolutionary theory states that speciation occurs due to natural selection acting upon random mutations, passing beneficial traits on to offspring. All extant species descend from common ancestors. Intelligent design states that some features of organisms are best explained by an intelligent designer. But this statement means nothing. ID proponents merely assert a vague identity of an entity that is responsible for a feature. They do not and cannot explain how this designer designed these "features," such as clotting agents or bacterial flagellum, nor can they explain how these designs were implemented. In a sense, theistic evolutionists believe in "intelligent design." They believe that God is responsible for the diversity of life. However, and this is the key difference, they also seek to explain how God did it. Their answer: through evolution. Evolution explains the mechanisms by which speciation occurs. ID does no such thing. If we were to apply ID-style "theory" to questions in other fields, it would yield similarly useless explanations. How were the moai on Easter Island created? By the natives, of course. Why did the Twin Towers collapse? Terrorists, duh! How is an atomic bomb made? By human beings. How were Egyptian hieroglyphics translated? By linguists. How did Mt. Everest form? By natural processes. So when ID proponents say: "A perfectly reasonable hypothesis is there's an intelligent designer ...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaNnAO-IRCc&hl=en