Intelligent Design is not creationism

Why do you suppose that is? Perhaps because the memes of christianity have been so deeply impressed apon your person that you cannot distinguish where one stops and the other begins?

george, I get tears in my eyes when I hear someone extoll the virtues of "the applied". We are such an overlooked frontier of science and eng. There is such an academic caste system imposed between the "applied" disciplines and the theoretical. In the 70's , when chemistry took on a new role with "nano reactions and super molecularity", It took us applied people to find out what we can do with all these adsorbed buckyballs.

I must say, Ive had my "fling" with the theoretical, but she had left me cold and full of angst that results in a "whats the point?" attitude.
Im more like the old Bill Cosbyline about being asked "why is there air"?
and I would immediately say"to disperse particles"

I must admit I did not know anybody quite like GeorgeOB at Cal Tech, although most of them did have distinct problems in communication. As far as complex constructs go, that group of boxcar sentences incorporates a style of writing I've always regarded as pretentious and prosaic at the same time. It may not be intentionally misleading -- many who have faith cannot explain it other than that unerring fact that it's nearly impossible to have faith in another person. In the end, one way or another, they will betray your trust.

I have, however, noted the inconsistencies and incompleteness of physics in describing what followed the initial singularity which it makes no attempt whatever to explain or describe.

In grad school I developed a real affection for applied mathematics. I got into advanced Linear Algebra, Tensor Analysis, Generalized Harmonic Analysis, etc, believing I was discovering new worlds. I still recall the day when I discovered that a Finite Fourier Transform was merely an Hermitian matrix. The whole structure that has so fascinated me collapsed into two or three central ideas. Then along came chaos and fractals. accompanied by new evidence of nature's use of self similar forms and the potential for chaos (deterministic but unpredictable. and yet self-regulating systems - all imbedded in even the simplest non-linear equations, but long ignored. Sensitive dependence opened so many new doors - ranging from classical problems like turbulent viscous flow to even new understanding of the complexities of the genome -- the relative difference between the information in ours and that of worms is trivial compared to the whole - and yet the difference! Later, I suspect we will discover yet another simplicity hidden by our usually overly complex constructs.

From what I hear from you is, and tell me if Im wrong."If we dont have a verifiable explanation at this moment, then we default to God". Ok Ill accept that as a challenge.

Remembre, when the Manhattan project began, ........,Each problem was attacked in order from a theoretical equation into a prastctical application.

Right now, we have about 5 or 6 cosmological phenomena that fit a "model". Equations surrounding this model have been developed and we can test equation and model components.
If we can formulate the question , were partway there. I dont think thats being too ful l of hubris, do you?

Or are we merely existing in its brain?