World Traveler wrote:
"Fletis Humplebacker" ! wrote in message
...

[snip]

What would a ID format be. The Intelligent Designer was/is intelligent?



[snip]

The "conventional view" of the Universe's development is supported by a
variety of experiments and measurements in a variety of disciplines. There
are testable experiments which work (or not) and which give us a greater
understanding of the unity of space, time, energy, gravity, etc.


That sounds pretty vague. But you demand specifics from ID?



The primary public support for a concept of Intelligent Design is for the
biblical description in Genesis, to have taken place 6,000-10,000 years ago.


So far you've made some wild sweeping allegations without any
support whatsoever.



The ID hypothesis that follows from that includes Noah and the flood, with
all of the animals getting on the Ark, to include dinosaurs (from which Noah
chose only juveniles, for reasons of space (!)), etc. These precepts don't
agree with fossil records, nor do they agree with the body of knowledge that
has been built up about our physical world. So far, when these disparities
have been brought up here, the ID proponents have simply reversed course,
and said they meant some other, unspecified type of ID.


Your argument is based on a false premise.


If you don't subscribe to that version of Intelligent Design, then to what
version of the ID hypothesis do you agree, and what physical evidence is
there that you're correct. If you have a concept that's supportable, lets
hear what it is! So far, no one has.

You based your objections of ID on biblical literalism and then want to
know which version I support?