Fundys are keen to cite examples in nature as splendid pieces of
engineering. The aeronautical properties of bird wings, the cardiac
system, the respiratory system, the balance between photosynthesis and
respiration processes without which life suffocates, as the work of an
intelligent designer.

There are many examples of poor "design" or design, which if
replicated by a human designer would see him looking for other work.
The eye with a built in blind spot, a spine jerry rigged from a 4
legged version, a dangerous birthing procedure, an appendix that only
causes illness and many more.

But can you imagine the process of design succession by an
"intelligent" designer of any human made products and product
improvement. Those parts of earlier design with residual features.
Humans just don't design in the "intelligent" way that fundys are
asking us to believe. Imagine a modern telephone that came with a
wheel onto which a rotary dial could be fixed. This is the sort of
thing seen in nature. Vestigial eyes for blind animals who live
permanently in dark caves. Why design a place where eyes could go for
an animal when the "intelligent" designer know that place a place
never be needed. The fundy would have us believe that the cave dweller
was designed as a finished product unrelated to, or adapted from,
anything else. When an improved product does not need a component used
in the earlier version it is simply left out. Designers do not
incorporate redundant components in reduced form.

It becomes more absurd when you consider how a product is assembled.
If you compare it with the pregnancy process. Imagine a radio which at
the start of a production line has inserted into it a place into which
vacuum tubes can be fixed and these are then taken out half through
the production line. What human would design such an irrational
assembly process? Or a calculator built first with cogs and wheels
which are withdrawn halfway through the assembly process before the
silicon chip is added. But this sort of assembly is what is seen in
nature.

IDers take what amount to good analogies with design to advance their
case and ignore problematical counter examples. But the ID analogy is
just that - an analogy. A weak one that breaks down when looked at too
closely. But IDers have rarified the analogy and confused pattern
recognition tendency of the mind with reality.

Fundys are keen to cite examples in nature as splendid pieces of
engineering. The aeronautical properties of bird wings, the cardiac
system, the respiratory system, the balance between photosynthesis and
respiration processes without which life suffocates, as the work of an
intelligent designer.

There are many examples of poor "design" or design, which if
replicated by a human designer would see him looking for other work.
The eye with a built in blind spot, a spine jerry rigged from a 4
legged version, a dangerous birthing procedure, an appendix that only
causes illness and many more.

But can you imagine the process of design succession by an
"intelligent" designer of any human made products and product
improvement. Those parts of earlier design with residual features.
Humans just don't design in the "intelligent" way that fundys are
asking us to believe. Imagine a modern telephone that came with a
wheel onto which a rotary dial could be fixed. This is the sort of
thing seen in nature. Vestigial eyes for blind animals who live
permanently in dark caves. Why design a place where eyes could go for
an animal when the "intelligent" designer know that place a place
never be needed. The fundy would have us believe that the cave dweller
was designed as a finished product unrelated to, or adapted from,
anything else. When an improved product does not need a component used
in the earlier version it is simply left out. Designers do not
incorporate redundant components in reduced form.

It becomes more absurd when you consider how a product is assembled.
If you compare it with the pregnancy process. Imagine a radio which at
the start of a production line has inserted into it a place into which
vacuum tubes can be fixed and these are then taken out half through
the production line. What human would design such an irrational
assembly process? Or a calculator built first with cogs and wheels
which are withdrawn halfway through the assembly process before the
silicon chip is added. But this sort of assembly is what is seen in
nature.

IDers take what amount to good analogies with design to advance their
case and ignore problematical counter examples. But the ID analogy is
just that - an analogy. A weak one that breaks down when looked at too
closely. But IDers have rarified the analogy and confused pattern
recognition tendency of the mind with reality.

-

Fundys are keen to cite examples in nature as splendid pieces of
engineering. The aeronautical properties of bird wings, the cardiac
system, the respiratory system, the balance between photosynthesis and
respiration processes without which life suffocates, as the work of an