The Flaw(s) in Intelligent Design...

[CrowCross]

Not all of them. Various pairs within 'dinosaur kind', at least one pair and possibly more depending on how many baramins there were within the overall dinosaur clade. Those dinosaurs survived the flood on the Ark. Where are their footprints in the mud left by the flood? Where are their bones? Either all dinosaurs were already extinct before the flood, or some survived on the Ark. Either way you are wrong here.

I don't know if this is what you're looking for but here's a whole page full of ancient dinosaur depictions of post flood dinosaurs.

Ancient Dinosaur Depictions | Genesis Park

www.genesispark.com

 

[rossum]

IOW, you have no explanation for DNA/RNA and RMNS is not the solution its existence. Why not simply start with that?

OK. I start with chemistry. RNA, DNA and proteins are all chemicals capable of storing information. Do you have a problem with chemistry?

 

[Cisco Qid]

OK. I start with chemistry. RNA, DNA and proteins are all chemicals capable of storing information. Do you have a problem with chemistry?

I give up, you win.

 

[vibise]

AT first you would not accept DNA/RNA as information and now you have a new criteria for eliminating design. Guess what! you will always come up with a method for eliminating design which goes along with my premise that secularists have eliminated design without cause. In the mean time, much of the public, is duped into thinking that Materialists have the answer. It is not us who are under the onus to show that life is designed because anyone with an ounce of sense can tell that we and the rest of Creation are designed. Your group may scorn this with statements like, "it looks designed to me", but it looks designed because it is designed and the new nano-technological discoveries in the cell and genome continue to demonstrate that we are designed.

Maybe I am missing something, but it seems to me that your arguments about "design" are really the acknowledgement that life is extraordinarily complex. We can all agree on that, but the difference is how to explain that complexity. Scientists have developed the theory of evolution which relies on observable natural mechanisms, especially mutation and natural selection, which can be observed and measured, and can be substantiated through experimentation, the fossil record, genome comparisons, etc. Creationists throw up their hands when faced with the complexity of life and posit the existence of a designer that cannot be observed and whose specific actions, methods, limitations cannot be identified. There is no science in ID creationism.