> One of the telling arguments against "Intelligent Design" is that a multitude of traits
> (the bones in mammalian ears, the panda's thumb, et., etc. are just ad hoc modifications
> of preexisting characteristics put to. new uses). If a real designer were planning life
> he(she,it?) woould never have done it in such an inefficient way.

Why do you think that the "designer" is a he or a she?

In terms of whether something is "inefficient" or not, that is a judgment call on your part! I am sure that one can always imagine how to do a better design on anything, but that is always a personal subjective interpretation of any given design, like for example a bridge, building, house, computer, car, airplane, boat, etc, etc!!!

> For example, humans are bipedal (i.e. walk upright) to enable to do so our spinal
> column is bent in a curious shape and BTW has condemned us to be very susceptible
> to lower back pain. Any designer should have done better.

Why? and what would have been a 'better' design?

I guess, given some intelligence, anyone can always pretend to be a better designer...

eom