(January 10, 2016 at 6:25 pm)AAA Wrote:(January 10, 2016 at 2:59 am)Irrational Wrote: We can observe laws and principles in action. Why insert a designer when the appearance of design (which is not the same as admitting design) can be explained without it?
Why assume designer when we see appearance of design? Because not doing so would be illogical. There is no coherent theory of abiogenesis and a problem stricken theory of evolution. I don't think it can (at least not yet) be explained without it.
Appearance of design is not the same as actual design. This is logic, you know.
I don't see any major problem with evolution that would render it not a good theory. As for abiogenesis, what is the problem with it that you feel demands a designer? Scientists seem to be doing well with figuring out how life came about, they're not going downhill.