Why is a \"designer\" so compelling? (The nature of a \'Creator\')

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Sunday, July 12, 2009, 18:57 (5612 days ago)

Open Letter to All - The argument I've run into most often in this site seems to be of the nature "life is too complex." - But this isn't really an argument. If we break it down, its more of a directed observation. - Life is incredibly complex. - No one can reasonably deny that. - But why do we have to consider a designer? That life is complex isn't enough for me. It seems like a cop-out answer, "It's too complex, we can't fathom it, so we have to invoke a creator." - It is a direct restatement of the old creationist "god of the gaps," and I haven't come across anything so compelling, largely because the writers in the field of Intelligent Design have been shown to have a purely political motivation. And in their science, they have been discredited--though science based on political ideology will nearly always be discredited. I've read Dembski and Behe, and can assure you that Dembski's math is baseless based on my experience in computer science. Biochemists have done the same thing to Behe's work. My true opinion on these authors is one that would be deleted were I to post it again. - Why--for you--is the idea of a designer actually valid? Tell me why invoking a supernatural deity is an acceptable alternative. My goal here is really to read and internalize, and my own posting will be limited to questions designed to reach a better understanding of your thinking. I don't plan on attacking your view--not in this thread at least. I want to collect the various arguments and see if they are based in ignorance, faith, or logic. (Or more categories should they surface.)