[CarolinaGuitarman]

" Re-stating my point for the 3rd time in the same thread, even I would call spam...."

The only thing I can get from your posts is you think that the fact that evidence for something doesn't yet exist is a good reason to think it will someday. In other words, it's because ID has no scientific evidence yet that we should investigate it that much harder. There are lots of things that have no scientific evidence that are technically possibly true; nonetheless, scientists don't bother themselves with claims that are untestable. Until ID makes testable claims it will be no more relevant to science than astrology, or the Theory of Santa Claus.

[darbymcgill]

The only thing I can get from your posts is you think that the fact that evidence for something doesn't yet exist is a good reason to think it will someday.

Then your inference would be wrong... I've posted my point to you in #672

If you have a question about something I've posted specifically and not something you wish that I posted, I will be happy to respond. It's all about consistency my friend, I'm just asking the scientists to be consistent....

[js1138]

In other words, it's because ID has no scientific evidence yet that we should investigate it that much harder.

The Democrats once used that logic to prove that Bush I flew to Paris on the Blackbird to arrange the Iranian hostage release. The fact that there was no evidence was proof that we needed an investigation.

I'll stick to my interpretation. Two hundred years of ID without a single proposal for research demonstrates lack of intent to conduct research.