Quote:
Quote by: Meleagar  "Who the designer is" is a red herring, nothing more, that anti-ID advocates use to derail or avoid discussion about the actual theory and the actual science and logic involved. |
Oh that's just ironic beyond belief. I started in this forum asking you some very basic questions about the theory statement itself, without ever once mentioning anything about the nature or identity of the designer. Basic questions like what in the biological realm is "best explained by intelligence", how that was determined to be so, what exactly is ID's "best explanation", what mechanism does ID propose for phenomena, is there any ongoing research into ID, and so on and so forth
Your response? You referred to such questions as "
red herrings, straw men and fishing expeditions".
It's absolutely fascinating to me how people can be so shockingly blind to their own behaviors. You are an excellent example. You keep asking, almost pleading, for people to talk about the actual ID theory statement, yet when someone does just that, you wave it away. You also keep asking for examples of evolutionary mechanisms generating "FSCI", yet when you're provided with published examples of it, you wave it away as a "straw man" because "no one is arguing that evolution doesn't happen".
The level of cognitive dissonance on display here is through the roof. It also serves as a very, very good demonstration of just how vacuous ID creationism is, and that the only way it can exist is by denying enormous amounts of data and waving away questions about its core concepts.
It's just fascinating to observe.