Well, I seem to have done it again, inspiring much debate concerning the philosophical and theological implications of materialistic Darwinism versus design and theism.
Disclosure: I am a former militant, Dawkins-style atheist, but now one of those dreadful born-again Christians who attends a semi-charismatic church every Sunday, plays keyboards in the praise band with much joy and fulfillment, and is actively engaged in Christian apologetics. ID was a major factor in my conversion, but it was by no means the only one.
I earn my living as a software engineer in aerospace R&D. My professional specialties include designing guidance, navigation and control software for precision-guided airdrop systems, and finite-element analysis of nonlinear dynamic systems. One my hobbies for many years has been computational artificial-intelligence research.
It was precisely because of these rigorous scientific, computational, and mathematical endeavors that it became transparently obvious to me that orthodox Darwinian “theory” was a Himalayan-sized pile of pseudo-scientific crap.
James Grover commented in the link supplied above: “I think the general cause of ID as an objective, nonreligious enterprise is not helped by posts like this one.”
ID is an inference to the best explanation based on what is known and understood. Its theological and philosophical implications are obvious, as are the theological and philosophical implications of Darwinian materialism, which I could not possibly muster up enough blind faith to believe in ever again, even if I tried.