I wonder if you would kindly try writing a post to me which isn't full of derision; it would make a nice change. Who are "you people"? Why is it necessary for you to tell me I'm lying, playing word games, whatever else, when you don't agree with something I say? Do you really think my raison d'etre is evolution and that I'm just the same as the other "evos" . . . insert whatever stereotype takes your fancy? How about a reminder of a good debate strategy: attack the message, not the messenger.

Your example of the sticks shows that it's difficult, if not impossible, to illustrate a 4-dimensional model in 3-dimensional space, though I daresay if you Googled this you'd find some better attempts by mathematicians. You accept the other 3 dimensions, yes? So how do you think something living on a 2-dimensional plane would be able to understand the third dimension? To it, a third dimension would seem impossible. And maybe it would then be saying "You lying scientists, always making stuff up -- well, I don't believe it!"

Using observed evidence to draw conclusions about something which cannot be seen might lead to scientific knowledge; but how does that translate into evidence for a god, or for creation? When an evolutionist says that a tree exists because it evolved from other species of trees and plants, this can be seen in the fossil record and possibly in its genetic makeup. Where is the scientific evidence that God created that tree just how it is? I think you're trying to re-hash the ID idea that we must conclude there is a designing god because things are irreducibly complex. You're back at the negative argument, which is essentially the argument from incredulity again: "I don't believe these things could have evolved." And yet scientists are pretty good at explaining how things could have evolved, using the evidence at their disposal. ID is going to need a better test for creation than this. What's more, if someone weren't approaching a problem with the predetermined notion that "this organism must have been created by God, therefore I must prove it", they might actually come to other conclusions, even if they are simply, "I don't understand this, so I'm going to investigate further and see what I can find out."