nakedemperor
Senior Member
no1tovote4 said:That is where you are incorrect. There is as much empirical evidence for one as the other. The Evolution theory has huge holes in it, and needs something to get it past that little hump of not even one single species has been found with a complete record of evolution.
The possibility of completing an evolutionary record, a complete one, for a living species is a massive, possibly impossible (at this point) undertaking. However, the assertion that existance of "missing links" points to Intelligent Design is ludicrous. ID is a completely arbitrary conclusion to jump to re: missing links.
There is as much evidence for ID as there is for evolution. Come oooon man. You say there are holes in evolution as a theory. Intelligent Design IS a hole,
NO1TOVOTE4 said:There is a missing piece in every case that makes guesses part of the "theory". The empirical evidence doesn't match up to the theory. At best it should be presented as a Hypothesis and not a theory. Those gaps suggest that ID may have played a part in that Evolution, and guessing that there may have been intervention is equally valid as guessing what pieces are missing in the evolutionary ladder.
Guessing that there was Intelligent Intervention in evolution is equally as valid as extrapolating from what we do know about the history of organisms on the earth to try to understand what links all organisms? Sooooo using existing evidence as "best guess" model is equally as valid as...making stuff up. Heh. Right.