I don’t need to. The resemblance will be blatantly obvious to everybody on this thread not named @Meerkat_SK5 .
Given that your half-baked, half-arsed, half-witted ‘theory’ IN NO WAY resembles ORCH-OR, a hypothesis (not a theory – and a controversial hypothesis at that) which NEITHER suggests NOR supports a “universal common designer”, there is no need for me to do so.
And before you whine that I am “ignorant” of the subject, like you falsely accused @Mercer, I would point out that I have already demonstrated that it is your own understanding that is DEFECTIVE:
You have done nothing on any of these threads that casts Design/Creationism in a positive light-- you have in fact done a great deal to confirm our worst stereotypes of advocates of that position – that of possessing a stubborn and willful ignorance on a par with the Flat Earth Society. I am aware that there are intelligent and thoughtful Creationists out there, I think they’d be horrified to be lumped in with the likes of you.
Further, you have done nothing to alter my earlier expressed opinion:
Addendum: it occurs to me that @Meerkat_SK5’s continued presence here is an implicit admission that they know that they’re not going to get a more positive reception elsewhere – in spite of the wholly negative reception here of their ‘theory’'s quality and improvability. Their choice is apparently between entirely negative reception and no reception at all. Which is rather sad really. 