Evolutionary biology explains adaptation, diversification, speciation, gene duplication, regulatory change, and other forms of biological innovation. If natural mechanisms can produce apparently designed organisms, why introduce intelligence?
This objection is important because biological design arguments cannot simply ignore evolutionary science. Our investigation of evolutionary mechanisms found substantial evidence that natural processes can produce meaningful biological change.
The existence of evolutionary mechanisms does not by itself decide the larger design question. Design and natural processes are not logically incompatible. A designed system can operate through regular processes.
The relevant question is therefore one of explanatory scope. Do evolutionary mechanisms adequately explain the origin of all the information, organization, and integrated systems under consideration, or do some features still provide positive evidence of intelligent causation?
Where is the boundary, if any, between what demonstrated evolutionary mechanisms can explain and what would require an additional causal explanation?