"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 ."
"You show a gap to be inexplicable by trying to explain it from an atheist worldview ?"
"That 's how it 'detected design ' in the eye ; that 's how it 'detected design ' in blood clotting ,"