@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote: Since you mentioned straw men in your post, Herald, I thought it appropriate to mention that you changed Intelligent Design to intelligent design when making that final comment...which was a straw man of sorts.
Intelligent design is intelligent design: 'a process beginning with intelligent agents (no matter whoever the agent might be) that produce complex and specified information (CSI). If an object was designed, it will contain high levels of CSI. The CSI is established by experimental tests . One of the tests for CSI is the presence of irreducible complexity, which can be discovered by experimental reverse-engineering to see if the objects require all of their parts to function properly. The presence of irreducible complexity leads to the conclusion that such structures were designed'.
If you take off the engine of an airplane it would not be able to blast off. You and me, for example cannot design the airplane for we don't have the CSI ... but there are avionics engineers that have the CSI.
BTW the very term of intelligent design for testing biological structures is derived from the things we have done as intelligent designers. I don't see what is the problem.
When you and FM claim that ID cannot exist ... this simply is not true ... for even in biology it exists (under the from of GMOs, grape varieties, stock breeding, etc.). Well, this ID may not be that ID, but it at least proves that ID in biology is possible ... unlike the evolutionist theories that cannot take out even one lab or non-lab example for evolutionary transformation ... of one species into another.