"You show a gap to be inexplicable by trying to explain it from an atheist worldview ? ThatÂ ’ s an objective , fair way to do it ? So completely unfair and unbiased that IDÂ ’ s different methods of searching add NOTHING ? ?"
"You show a gap to be inexplicable via natural forces by trying to explain it via natural forces . You ca n't do it by hypothesising supernatural forces , because that 's just meaningless unfalsifiable speculation . ID does n't have a different method of searching - all it does is give up quicker . That 's how it 'detected design ' in the eye ; that 's how it 'detected design ' in blood clotting , the immune system - it just gave up looking for natural explanations and assumed design filled the gap ."
"inexplicable by trying to explain it from an atheist worldview"
"inexplicable via natural forces by trying to explain"