[cap-talk] Off-topic: watchmaker argument

[Sam Mason]

  sorry, that wasn't meant to go to the list! this thread seems to be
  going off into the trees a bit

On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 12:04:20AM +0000, Sam Mason wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 02:47:52PM -0800, Mike Samuel wrote:
> > The core claims of ID are that there is a non-empty set of existing
> > irreducibly complex artifacts and that these must have been designed and
> > that a design is evidence of a designer.
>
> As it's the proponents of ID that postulate the presence of a designer,
> I find it slightly counterintuitive that we should be trying to prove
> this set is empty.  In my mind the onus is on supporters of ID to find
> examples of "designed" things.  Once an example is found then I'll be
> prepared to accept the presence of a "designer".

-- 
  Sam  http://samason.me.uk/