You’re assuming an omniscient, omnipotent Designer who would have wanted the best design possible. As I understand it, the Intelligent Design theory, in its pure form, simply states that living organisms were designed by some Intelligence as opposed to evolving naturally by unaided chance. While that “some Intelligence” is identified with the Christian God by many of ID’s supporters, that is neither an axiom nor a conclusion of ID per se.
There’s no such thing as “too flawed to have been designed,” since we’ve all encountered human-designed things that are seriously flawed.
This post should not be taken as being in support of Intelligent Design. I am not a proponent of the theory, but I do think it has more naive appeal than it is often given credit for.
No, I’m just assuming a designer that put some real thought into their design. Any such designer would acknowledge that their design will not be perfect, but would identify the flaws in their design, and determine whether or not fixing them is worth the effort or time.
Why would a creator have chosen to keep these design flaws, instead of attempting to fix them? Laziness? Impending deadline?
(BTW - I appreciate you making these points, despite not being a supporter of the idea; keeps us honest.)
I completely agree; which is why I compared the statement to “too complex to have happened by chance” (i.e., there’s no such thing).