Dennetts arguement

Many philosophers have been trying to prove the existence of God through different means. Daniel Dennett believes that the natural selection is the process which has the power to generate ingenious designs. Intelligent Design (ID) according to Dennett is not a legitimate school of thought as it fails to explain what it seeks to explain. The proponents of ID assert that the process of evolution and features of the living things can be explained through intelligence cause and not through the process of natural selection. Through examples of the human body and the nature, Dennett puts forth his arguments in support of the process of natural selection.
People have been trying to shake the world’s confidence in quantum physics through different scientific theories but they have been unsuccessful because the world can see something tangible and Einstein’s theory of relativity is well established beyond doubt. These are the people who argue that intelligent causes can explain the complex, information-rich structures of science and biology but people have never really been able to get the their heads around the concepts involved. Dennett is however convinced that any creation must have a creator and supernatural things cannot be explained through intelligent causes. He believes there is plenty of motivation to resist the assurance of the biologists and that ID is a hoax but people find ingenious ways to fool themselves.
In support of his argument that natural selection is the process which has the power to generate ingenious designs, Dennett discuses the evolution of the eye. The intelligent design proponents feel that a fully evolved eye is evidence of intelligent design process but evolutionary biology has proved that this is wrong. Dennett also argues on the history of genes involved in the evolution process. He argues that if evolution did not occur through the process of natural selection, species would have found it difficult to adapt to their environment. The proponents of intelligent design have not been able to come up with any theory that challenges the theory of evolution. Dennett convincingly states that no intelligent design hypothesis till date has been able to give a rival explanation of any biological phenomenon. Intelligent design cannot even explain why human beings differ from their relatives. Dennett recounts that there are plenty of scientific controversies that are not yet in public knowledge as the scientists and biologists are first trying to get acceptance from their peers.
Dennett’s arguments have a strong base because no intelligent cause can prove the evolution of the eye and nor has an experiment been able to challenge the mainstream biological understanding. If it were possible scientists could have replaced man-made organs to function as original. Evolution through the process of natural selection is also valid because we do see different species adapting to their environment or human beings sharing similarities with their offspring.
Intelligent design certainly cannot explain many of the things that exist in the nature. If intelligent causes could create things why would the world suffer with spells of droughts in some places and floods at other places? Intelligent causes cannot even predict floods; intelligent designers could not forewarn about Tsunami. Intelligent Design has no basis except for the scientists to develop a battleground, as rightly pointed out by Dennett.