The Argument against ID

The ID argument seems to be that the world is too complex for it to have just ‘happened’. Someone smart must have created it – and that person is God. Simple enough.

The problem is, of course, the very complexity they claim points to an intelligent design, causes one to question it. The issue is between the controlling of something and the adaptation of something.

Evolution says we (the universal we including animals, plants, ect) adapt to changes. Basic Darwin – animals best suited for a particular environment thrive, while the others die off. Birds fly to an island where there are no predators, and eventually lose the ability to fly – because it was no longer important to survive. This is not theory, but has been observed.

ID says that someone thought all this stuff up. The question then, is why? There was no need for God to respond to an environment of create something that fit some scheme. He (or she) had a blank slate. Why, then, did God not come up with a simpler set-up? Why did he create something so fragile – when he could have made it heartier? Why did he put asteroids in random places, so that they had the potential to undo all his work? Why did he make the Duck-Billed platypus a warm blooded animal that lays eggs?

There are only three real options, the first one being ‘to test us’, which is a religious cop out. Neither of two remaining bode well for god:

1. God is not all powerful. This ties into the ‘aliens created us’ theory. God didn’t create the universe, of even our part of it. Rather he had to create life which could adapt to things he can’t control. This would, though, imply he is not really a God, but rather just powerful and smart.

2. He is Crazy and/or Mean: When looked at through the eyes of evolution, the Duck-Billed platypus makes sense. It’s an offshoot – a evolution which incorporates elements of survivability from other species. When looked at through the eyes of a creator, though – you have to see it as the result of a mad scientist, who had parts left over and just plunked it together because he could. Or who liked the though of life having to figure out a way to prevent an asteroid from killing us all. Or to use energy in such a way that we don’t destroy our own planet. What sane person would create life under these circumstances? This isn’t the act of a rational god who owns a pet and makes sure he gets fed and walked and cared for. This is the act of a five-year old ‘bug collector’ who likes to see what happens when you put a bug under magnifying glass.

ID takes evolution, and assumes an intelligent hand created the complexity. The question surrounding ID is, however, if God could create a world – why would he create it so complex? Why not make us solar-powered so no one goes hungry? Why not make the earth uniformly warm and wet, so no one goes thirsty or dies from exposure. Why make hurricanes?

The response is, of course, that we can’t know. It’s God’s ‘plan’ and we can’t comprehend it. If that’s the case, though, what purpose is served by introducing ID at all?