I agree it would be wrong to say that that argument can prove one religion's creation story over another. That's one of those things that annoys me about these threads. But it can show that natural selection is an insufficient mechanism for creating complex structures.
Fair enough. For what it's worth, this animistic pantheist favors intelligent design over some sort of evolution-from-inanimate-soup, for reasons largely tied to irreducible complexity. I just haven't bought into biblical Creation.
I don't think serious debaters on either side would make such claims. The real argument seems to be over which side is best supported by the evidence.
Hmm. Perhaps I haven't been paying attention. I'm used to seeing fanatical proof-by-assertion coming from both camps when this debate arises. But of course, when you stand far enough back that the volume isn't painful, all you hear is the distant screaming of the nutters; the reasoned debate of the actual thinkers is much the quieter and difficult to hear.
-BP
