Scientific proof that prayer works, A MUST SEE FOR EVERYONE

[Chris Ludington]

There is nothing condescending about my questions (at least not intentionally). They are legitimate questions that I think deserve answers if one is going to say "I believe in intelligent design".

By definition you are calling this creator intelligent. Since we MUST use our own definition of intelligence we must have certain expectations of intelligence to be displayed. So when there is a laundry list of things that directly conflict with the "intelligence" of that creator those things must be questioned.

And answering a question with several more questions really isn't an answer at all.

[David Rosado]

This is more like it. Presenting your questions with sarcasm isn't the right way to go.

Anyhow, I've heard the argument that creation isn't intelligent at all. That makes no sense. In that case, then the fact that cars can break down or cause injury means that we aren't intelligent. Architects aren't intelligent if their structure can fail. If we're using our understanding of intelligence, if something is able to create something that we are still working to understand, that would make that creator superior in intelligence to us. Again, saying otherwise is basically saying "I could do better."

BTW, I answered your questions with more questions to show you that your questions don't quite work. You need to ask the right questions to get to the root. Either that or operate under a specific presupposition. The thing is, creationism has a lot of pressuppositions so there's no single way to answer all questions perfectly.

The odds of existence are slim to none. Some people say "miraculous coincidence!" Other say "must be a creator!" Too many coincidences for me to say it's random occurrence. And because of this, I believe in a creator. As to who, what, where, when, why, and how? I can't answer 100%.

[Chris Ludington]

.. As to who, what, where, when, why, and how? I can't answer 100%.

You, sir, are the minority.