Kerostasis

That one's easy: Because no one has the slightest clue how, or if, it works, and its a critical requirement of the rest of Naturalistic Evolution.

The official argument of ID does not concern itself with what you plug in, only with establishing that there is a hole that needs to be filled by something, whatever that something may be. You can learn a little about the characteristics of the something by examining the shape of the hole, but you are still fundamentally limited by the fact that you are looking at a hole rather than an object.

That said, I've got a pretty good personal opinion on what that something is, but the type of evidence I use for this question is theological rather than scientific. Theologically, the Christian God is very plausible to me and Zeus is very implausible. Scientifically the best that can be said is that Zeus doesn't fit the shape of the hole very well.

__________________

Switch

Evolution is a functional process that exists and has been demonstrated to exist. There is no debate about whether or not evolution is real. I have watched cultures in a petri dish evolve due to mutation in front of my eyes (after pressing the 'zap with UV light button'). Cichlid fishes evolve so quickly that we can't even keep species cataloged in lake victoria. Pathogens routinely evade our attempts to kill them with drugs and antibiotics. Every single piece of life has libraries of evidence in deactivated DNA sitting in their respective genomes that show the steps they took in their evolutionary process. If you care to watch an embryo develop you will see as it quickly jumps through stages in its evolutionary history creating and then losing vestigial limbs/organs/orifices... and with no surprise fetuses from different species follow the same steps, hinting at a shared lineage.

Lets not argue about the merits of evolution.

As far as 'ID' the re branded version of creationism, it is not SCIENCE to postulate a 'theory' that cannot be tested and validated. People who support ID constantly make the mistake of thinking they have any understanding of what science is... and so they think their assertions are just as valid as those of scientists who follow a process of empiricism, peer review, and validation that is known collectively as 'scientific method'. Id proponents use 'sciency words' thinking that science is simply a matter of stating your belief with an inflated vocabulary.

__________________
|TG|Switch

Better known as:
That noob who crashed the chopper.
That noob who ran over the mine.
That noob who TK'd me with a sniper rifle.
That noob who hit that APC at 300m with light AT! Our APC...

RandomGuy

Sounds like a philosophical position by your description.

So why is it called "intelligent design" instead of bio-hole-ology?

xTYBALTx

__________________
Current good song: Justice - Stress

Switch

LOL that is hilarious!
My favorite line
'He's smarter than you, he studied biology'

__________________
|TG|Switch

Better known as:
That noob who crashed the chopper.
That noob who ran over the mine.
That noob who TK'd me with a sniper rifle.
That noob who hit that APC at 300m with light AT! Our APC...