Found On The Net

>And evolution was BS until it was 'proven'.

Yep. It required FACTS - lots and lots of FACTS
gleaned from MANY interlocking disciplines. It
got those facts, a hundred times over.

The Darwin/Wallace hypothesis was short on, although
not totally lacking, facts when it was first proposed.
As such it was a weak theory that really didn't stand
out above any of the various theistic/secular creation
and development ideas of the day. However, no supportable
facts could be found favoring those other theories whereas
a great bounty of facts steadily accrued supporting the
natural selection theory - from paleontology, from geology,
from chemistry, biology, physics, molecular biology and
others.

If you're putting together a jigsaw puzzle of Elvis and
there's a missing piece or two - a bit of an ear, part
of a sequin jumpsuit - you can STILL tell the final
picture is gonna be Elvis. The missing bits are NOT
going to turn it into a picture of Martha Stewart.
Likewise, not EVERY piece of the evolutionary puzzle
has yet been found, but the big picture is already
plain and unmistakable - has been for a LONG time now.

BTW ... [Intelligent Design] is inherently self-contradictory. It asserts
that complex entities cannot self-develop without 'help'
from a 'designer'. This means the designer has to have
had a designer - that gods have to be made by greater
gods - so on and so forth to infinity. No escape, no
endpoint, ever. Ridiculous. Say that even ONE entity
anywhere along the chain may have managed to self-evolve
and you've left the door open for any and ALL entities
being able to self-evolve.

If you're looking for [Intelligent Design] ... Look for meddling by
little grey alien dudes or something. You MIGHT be
able to find a fact or two supporting that and
manage to avoid the fatal infinite-regression logic
error too. Earthly life may have been engineered
at any point in its development by external agents,
but at least ONE had to have evolved on its own.