Here is a claim made by a commenter at an ID-friendly site:
They lie because 99% of the time noone will never know, and they can easily win the debate. There is little integrity on their side. Most pro-ID people, if shown one of their arguments is bad, will stop using it. Most anti-ID people don’t care whether their arguments are bad, they just want to use whatever is effective at winning. There’s a lot of bad faith on their side.
I (news writer O’Leary) only raise this because I had been researching the Cambrian explosion, and everything you ever wanted to know about the reasons to doubt Darwin’s followers’ history of life can be found by studying their reactions to the Cambrian explosion: All seem to be attempts to explain away the fact that most basic life forms appeared suddenly within a comparatively short period of time. It is just like atheist cosmologists’ attempts to explain away fine-tuning of the universe—as if there would ever be any problem with that for anybody other than diehard atheism or Darwin believers.
So life and the universe are designed? So?
Here’s an interesting Cambrian animal recently found in British Columbia, Canada, that started my question:
The researcher believes that Kooteninchela deppi would have been a hunter or scavenger. Its large Edward Scissorhands-like claws with their elongated spines may have been used to capture prey, or they could have helped it to probe the sea floor looking for sea creatures hiding in sediment.
Kooteninchela deppi was approximately four centimetres long with an elongated trunk for a body and millipede-like legs, which it used to scuttle along the sea floor with the occasional short swim.
It also had large eyes composed of many lenses like the compound eyes of a fly. They were positioned on top of movable stalks called peduncles to help it more easily search for food and look out for predators.
The exquisitely complex eyes, absolutely necessary for the way of life described, just evolved accidentally at the same time, right? All just sorta happened.
Like things never do in real life.
Researchers mostly get public instead of private money. So no one forces them to ask critical questions.