[Alamo-Girl]

Er, I was eavesdropping and would like to offer a response to your challenge to BenLurkin for one fact that supports ID or one principle formed by any of the facts:

The current "issue" is that genetic mechanisms for development and adaptation of functional biological systems, such as eyes, are evidently virtually identical across phyla, indicating that either:

they were present in a common ancestor (evolution biology) or

they are pre-programmed in ancestors (intelligent design) or

they are a common building block (creationism.)

Notably, if they were present in a common ancestor, it would indicate that the mechanism, such as eyeness, existed long before it would be used.

This runs contrary to the classical evolution hypothesis that the branches of the "tree of life" developed as a result of random mutations. It may however be explained by automata – autonomous self-organizing complexity (tortoise, Wolfram, Rocha, Pattee.)

But the methodology whereby such a mechanism could arise has not yet been ascertained:

Origin of Life Prize

"The Origin-of-Life Prize" ® (hereafter called "the Prize") consists of $1.35 Million (USD) paid directly to the winner(s). The Prize will be awarded for proposing a highly plausible mechanism for the spontaneous rise of genetic instructions in nature sufficient to give rise to life. To win, the explanation must be consistent with empirical biochemical and thermodynamic concepts as further delineated herein, and be published in a well-respected, peer-reviewed science journal(s).

[Lysander]

Bzzzt. No prize. No evidence. No truth. Insect eyes are way different from hunman eyses. Dog eyes and human eyes differ in color sensitivity and construction. On and on I could go. Cats respond to movement in the field of vision, dogs see both movement and still objects. Some insects see ultraviolet wave lengths that we do not, and some see heat.