*Originally posted by FyreStar Well, your first two 'strikes' are entirely random and inexplicable, I'll ignore them until you provide a little support. * The first is too tough for evolutionists. Tough is usually transcribed as "inexplicable." One example, human DNA has about 3 billion base pairs. We would have to have averaged one new base pair every 18 months or so for 5 billion years straight to evolve from dirt to man. *So we're not here?! Dang, and here I was thinking I existed. So tell me.. if we aren't here........where are we?* Beats me. According to the theory of evolution, we aren't the final aim, so who knows where or what the final aim is? *Evolution doesn't look into the future and say 'Ok, we need something that can eat horses'. Nay, in fact evolution isn't about what happened in any other time period than the present. A species finds out that mice are a great source of daily protein, and that species gradually turn into living 'mousetraps'. Species (like Behe's moustrap) aren't randomly created out of nothing with but one purpose.* Purpose, of course, implies that there is an aim. So which is it, aim, or no aim? *Originally posted by tiassa I would ask you what you're arguing about if nobody's made that claim.* If nobody's made that claim, then where did the theory of evolution come from and why are there so many people trying to defend it? *Let's see, I could always try to dig up a birth certificate, I could always try to dig up any patents associated with the car, or I could always try to dig up the original plans for the Corvette design. Any combination of those generally provide better proof. * So, the existence of the Corvette itself constitutes no proof at all for you? *In fact, what would be best about it is if you prove the designer of the Corvette, we can then examine your method of proof and apply it to the Universal Designer and decide what we need to prove its existence. * OK, I named the designer and the designed product. At no point did you deny the existence of either, even though this would have been the perfect time to do so. You knew there was a car, and you automatically knew there had to be a designer. Not only that, the only proof you require is a piece of paper with the name of the designer written on it. It kind of sucks to be you right about now. You know there is a universe and you know there is a designer. There is even a piece of paper with the designer's name on it along with a description of the design. You're just playing stupid little head games. *By end, are we considering the present station in time? Or by end, are we considering the final version? * More head games. Both.