I hear there’s an entire field devoted to studying the evolution of morphology, called Evo-Devo. I believe I have a book about it too by some Sean B Caroll dude. Clearly no answers exist on these questions eh?
Indeed. When has ID ever attempted to demonstrate anything other than by proving a negative? Almost the entire content of every ID book is evolution-negation work, with no suggestion how one would even investigate positive evidence for design.
Technically, only technically, Dembski’s ID arguments are not negative proofs, in that they do not prove that it is impossible for ordinary evolutionary forces to result in the high degree of adaptation that we see. Instead, they try to argue that it is very improbable that they can do so. So improbable that this would not happen even once in the whole history of the universe. A distinction without a practical difference, since most of us would agree that having such a low probability makes the event one which can be ruled out. Or rather, we would agree that it can be ruled out, if Dembski’s arguments actually worked. Which they don’t.
And all this has been explained to colewd many, many times.