[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you believe its impossible that complexity can occur without a designer or just that no alternative that satisfies you has been given?

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe that there is no naturalistic explanation for information rich systems.(as of yet) I think this and many other things point to design.

Maybe we should start an "Is ID Science?" thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your initial point was about the complexity of DNA. If you want to explain why you think ID is true (which I assume is the purpose of the thread) then the issue is why complexity requires a designer, not how complex DNA is.

Why you think complexity requires a designer is what I am trying to understand. We've established its not for naturalistic reasons so I was exploring whether its for logical reasons. Hence the question.

If I understand you, you are saying you believe in ID partly because as yet you have no heard no other satisfactory explanation (even though you accept there might be one). Is that right?

What is the nature of the other reasons for your belief in ID. We've dealt with the natural and hopefully I've understood you on the logical.

chez