Why would you expect intelligent design to explain that very much better than evolution?
I think the reasoning is more along the lines that intelligent design is worse at explaining haphazard mush than it is at explaining well ordered things. As such an observation of well ordered things will result in a high weighting for intelligent design than an observation of haphazard mush in the same place simply because it must be discounted far less in the former case.
Right, but that’s only half the story… I wouldn’t say it’s zero evidence, but “convincing argument” seems far flung when there’s plenty of reason for evolution to select for better use of our brain meats.
I think the reasoning is more along the lines that intelligent design is worse at explaining haphazard mush than it is at explaining well ordered things. As such an observation of well ordered things will result in a high weighting for intelligent design than an observation of haphazard mush in the same place simply because it must be discounted far less in the former case.
Right, but that’s only half the story… I wouldn’t say it’s zero evidence, but “convincing argument” seems far flung when there’s plenty of reason for evolution to select for better use of our brain meats.