Calculating God question

It's a proof of Intelligent Design by what might happen/be noticed in the future. I absolutely loved this book, but like you I was bothered by his using the extinction events. With me it seems like if there were going to be extinction events on multiple worlds it would have a cause that would affect a larger area, not several well-aimed shots like comets or asteroids hitting the planets. I'm curious if anyone holds this book up as a proof of ID?

ID cannot be presented well...to any rational thinker. Not science, never will be.

I think my biggest problem with this book is that I love the discussion of ID vs evolution and was hoping for a better presentation on it. It disappointed me in how poorly it turned out. I thought the scifi backdrop would give a great fresh take on things but after all the "evidence" the alien brought forth it seemed to only ruin what I expected to be a fun debate to read.

I thought this was good attempt at creating a new take on the "alien invasion" scenario.

While I did find the precipitating crisis (I don't want to reveal too much for those who haven't read it) a little too facile, I liked the effort expended in creating new kinds of psychology for the extraterrestrials, and I found all the facts presented that collectively are known as the Anthropic Principle and which highlight the amazing way this Universe seems to be designed for life fascinating and amazing.Even the most die hard of rationalist have realized this and the need to account for it somehow(see Infinite Universes Theory).

I realize this book is going to be a lightening rod for those who disparage ID, but I think they miss the point- this is science FICTION and should be judged on that basis.

And on that basis the various plot contrivances are no worse than in most sci-fi while the premise is a little more imaginative than many.

It looks like some people may have read this book to address personal political points of view; which is a shame in my view because it's a well written and entertaining story on its own... which did not to me at least, appear as if the author was attempting to interject with contemporary dialogues on old questions.

Since "Intelligent Design" is just a modernized version of an old myth, there's really no point in telling a story to address a "single state within a morphing politic". I would suggest that if readers wish to explore that particular flavour of delusionary expressions of humanity, there are many other, more direct expositions on the topic.