Never once do any of the IDers reference the words, Designer, Creator or Intelligent Cause. That is not surprising. Even though all three are proponents of Intelligent Design, they avoid making reference to the Designer. Yet, Intelligent Design, by definition, requires an intelligent designer. A supernatural entity.
I believe there to be a flaw in your logic.
say for example we need to prove the existence of life on mars, lets call it "marshian one"
so if I quote a bunch of conclusions regarding marshian one, then that adds no information to the discussion.
you need to prove why marshian one is real, before going on and on about somethign that may or probably does not exist.
it's the same with intelligent design and the designer, they don't need to name a designer for example.
they simply need to show design that cannot be accounted for by biological, stellar or chemical evolution, and there are lots and lots of examples.
I can think of three for example right now, that no evolutionist has explained to me in ten years of debating this topic.
many relating to stellar evolution, like the existence of comets of ice that melt after a certain amount of years (existance of comets show a young universe).
let me put a clip on them for now:
"
Short-Lived Comets
A comet spends most of its time far from the sun in the deep freeze of space. But, once each orbit, a
comet comes very close to the sun, allowing the sun’s heat to evaporate much of the comet’s ice and
dislodge dust to form a beautiful tail. Comets have little mass, so each close pass to the sun greatly
reduces a comet’s size, and eventually comets fade away. They can’t survive billions of years.
Two other mechanisms can destroy comets — ejections from the solar system and collisions with
planets. Ejections happen as comets pass too close to the large planets, particularly Jupiter, and the
planets’ gravity kicks them out of the solar system. While ejections have been observed many times, the
first observed collision was in 1994, when Comet Shoemaker-Levi IX slammed into Jupiter.
Given the loss rates, it’s easy to compute a maximum age of comets. That maximum age is only a few
million years. Obviously, their prevalence makes sense if the entire solar system was created just a few
thousand years ago, but not if it arose billions of years ago.
Rescuing Devices
Evolutionary astronomers have answered this problem by claiming that comets must come from two
sources. They propose that a Kuiper belt beyond the orbit of Neptune hosts short-period comets
(comets with orbits under 200 years), and a much larger, distant Oort cloud hosts long-period comets
(comets with orbits over 200 years).
Yet there is no evidence for the supposed Oort cloud, and there likely never will be. In the past 20 years,
astronomers have found thousands of asteroids orbiting beyond Neptune, and they are assumed to be
the Kuiper belt. However, the large size of these asteroids (Pluto is one of the larger ones) and the
difference in composition between these asteroids and comets argue against this conclusion.
-Ken Ham, The New Answer Book #4, copy write 2013, master’s books
Yet another Creationist book expands on this problem:
The Facts Are .....
(1) The problem for evolution is that if short period comets only last about 10,000 years, and the solar
system is 5 billion years old, then there should not be any of these comets left in existence. As
short-period comets have been visible this century (eg Halley's comet), the solar system must be
considerably younger than the date assigned to it by evolutionary theory. [based on logic]
(2) The belief in a 5 billion year old solar system has led to a hypothesis that these comets must be
resupplied from outside the solar system - an example of a preconceived idea determining scientific
belief. A vast shell of 100 billion comets, called the 'Oort Cloud' is theorized to exist at the outer edge
of the solar system. Passing stars are supposed to disturb the cloud enough to knock a comet into an
inner orbit. This is a theory that is not based on any observed facts. Astrophysics and Space Science, Vol.
31, 1974
p:385-401
(3) The facts about the Oort cloud are:- (1) It has never been observed, and should be regarded as an
evolutionary prediction; (2) The calculated motions of comets do not match well with any predictions
based on the Oort Cloud; and (3) Cometary evidence does not support the existence of an Oort cloud.
Astrophysics and Space Science, Vol. 31, 1974 p:385-401
(4) Some researchers believe that if the Oort theory is true, then some comets from our solar system
should have escaped. Likewise, we should have seen about six comets over the past 150 years from
other star systems. Science Frontiers, May-June, 1990 p:1; Sky & Telescope, Vol. 79, 1990 p:254
(5) As the Oort Cloud has not been discovered yet, new theories are rising to explain the existence of
short-life comets. The latest theory is that "Halley's comet comes from a second much closer belt of
millions of comets just outside the solar system left over as debris and junk when the outer planets
formed 5 billion years ago". This theory is spoken of in a factual manner, yet is not based on fact. The
Advertiser (Adelaide), May 14, 1988 p:20
(6) A theory put forward for the origins of short-period comets states that they are belched out of
volcanoes, most probably on Jupiter. But, (1) the theory is not supported by observation; (2) there is
no planetary mechanism that would impart the force needed to expel the comets; (3) the physical
makeup of comets does not match this origin; and (4) the comet would need to be travelling at over
700 Km/sec to escape a large planet, a speed which would cause it to vaporize in the process. Harold S.
Slusher, "Age of the Cosmos: ICR technical Monograph #9", Institute for Creation Research: San Diego,
1980 p:49
(7) The evidence of life on comets is based on infra-red analysis of Haley's Comet which indicated that
organic matter was pouring out of its head and tail. A study of the data, however, suggests that these
organic molecules are not the kind associated with living organisms. The Sydney Morning Herald, April 3,
1986 p:2”
Unmasking Evolution – Laurence D Smart, copy write 2000.
In conclusion:
The Oort cloud is unobserved. And the Kuiper belt has huge comets, nothing the size of what we see in
the universe as considered short term. That is the only thing observed! You literally have no other
answer for short term comets other than the kuiper belt, secondly you have no other answer for long
term comets! As the Oort cloud was something completely fabricated in order to explain for the
existence of flying comets in an "old" universe- (that’s cold) but also in a universe that is constantly
tearing the ice from the comet! As you can tell the tails on the comets are ice trails! Meaning every
comet is literally falling apart at the seams! (generally speaking). Basically flying ice should not last
billions of years. Maybe a few million at best, maaaayyybbee. And short term comets most likely tens of
thousands of years maaaayyybbeee.
]
