Intelligent Design: Did you design yourself?

[Heywood]

Can't the same criticism be leveled against evolution?

For instance could one say "Evolution is not science, Even if you demonstrate "multiple evolutionary pathways", this does not mean it must have evolved"?

I don't think it is unreasonable to look for objective ways to differentiate designed things from those which are undesigned. I'm not convinced looking for high levels of CSI are a good way to do it, but it is, in my opinion, a good faith attempt at solving a problem.

I'm not quite sure what you mean. The equivalent would be "just because it has been demonstrated that organisms evolve by natural selection, it does not mean this particular organism evolved by this means". Horses evolved primarily due to natural selection, then via selective breeding. We will likely get to the stage where we could design a simple organism ,and then produce it. This doesn't mean therefore that we ourselves were designed.

Creationists think every single thing in the universe was designed, yet they also claim to be able to be able to tell if something is not designed, despite that fact they've never supposedly encountered something that is not designed.

What creationist believe is irrelevant. The proposal that certain features of the universe or certain biological systems are intelligently designed is either true or false regardless of their belief....it just so happens to be true. How do you identify which features or systems are designed and which are not is a valid and useful quest for knowledge. How does SETI know if a signal they receive is from an intellect or cosmic noise? How do you know if something you find on say the moon is a structure or formation?