> You can't "see" that accident anymore than you can "see" G-d, so the amount of faith required to believe one or the other (or any other variation) is the same

> You can't "see" that accident anymore than you can "see" G-d, so the amount of faith required to believe one or the other (or any other variation) is the same. This is atrociously false. The amount of assumptions you need for intelligent design FAR outweigh the theory of evolution by natural selection plus standard cosmogony (big bang theory). For the former you need everything to ALREADY exist in the "mind" of the creator, but for the latter all you need is a big bang and a RNG. It's completely silly to put these two hypotheses on equal footing. Also, God knows what you meant, no need to hide it.