Greetings,I commence open challenge to anyone

[Chad32]

As far as argument from design goes, I've heard that people say the universe must be created because everything is so complex. Except that when somethign is designed intelligently, it's generally as simple and efficient as possible. In fact many inventions are just more simple and efficient versions of things we already use. So why would complexity be an indication of intelligent design?

The teleological argument states that since the universe displays such an amazing design, there must have been a divine Designer. For example, if the Earth were significantly closer or farther away from the sun, it would not be capable of supporting much of the life it currently does. If the elements in our atmosphere were even a few percentage points different, nearly every living thing on earth would die. The odds of a single protein molecule forming by chance is 1 in 10243 (that is a 1 followed by 243 zeros). A single cell is comprised of millions of protein molecules.So you said why would complexity be an indication of an intelligent design,simple,because the more complex something,the more knowledge is required in order to make the,thing/object,for example we human's are complex but yet simple,we don't make a noise when we move.The word teleology comes from telos, which means "purpose" or "goal." The idea is that it takes a "purposer" to have purpose, and so, where we see things obviously intended for a purpose, we can assume that those things were made for a reason. In other words, a design implies a designer. We instinctively make these connections all the time. The difference between the Grand Canyon and Mount Rushmore is obvious—one is designed, one is not. The Grand Canyon was clearly formed by non-rational, natural processes, whereas Mount Rushmore was clearly created by an intelligent being—a designer. When we are walking on a beach and find a wristwatch, we do not assume that time and random chance produced the watch from blowing sand. Why? Because it has the clear marks of design—it has a purpose, it conveys information, it is specifically complex, etc. In no scientific field is design considered to be spontaneous; it always implies a designer, and the greater the design, the greater the designer. Thus, taking the assumptions of science, the universe would require a designer beyond itself (i.e., a supernatural designer).

The teleological argument applies this principle to the whole universe. If designs imply a designer, and the universe shows marks of design, then the universe was designed. Clearly, every life form in Earth's history has been highly complex. A single strand of DNA equates to one volume of the Encyclopedia Britannica. The human brain has approximately 10 billion gigabytes of capacity. Besides living things here on Earth, the whole universe seems designed for life. Literally hundreds of conditions are required for life on Earth—everything from the mass density of the universe down to earthquake activity must be fine-tuned in order for life to survive. The random chance of all these things occurring is literally beyond imagination. The odds are many orders of magnitude higher than the number of atomic particles in the whole universe! With this much design, it is difficult to believe that we are simply an accident. In fact, top atheist/philosopher Antony Flew's recent conversion to theism was based largely on this argument.

In addition to demonstrating God's existence, the teleological argument exposes shortcomings in the theory of evolution. The  movement in science applies information theory to life systems and shows that chance cannot even begin to explain life’s complexity. In fact, even single-celled bacteria are so complex that, without all of their parts working together at the same time, they would have no survival potential. That means those parts could not have developed by chance. Darwin recognized that this might be a problem someday just by looking at the human eye. Little did he know that even single-celled creatures have too much complexity to explain without a creator!

Administrator Notice
The text of this post appears to come verbatim from gotquestions.org (http://www.gotquestions.org/Does-God-exist.html and http://www.gotquestions.org/teleological-argument.html). Posting another person's words and trying to pass them off as original, or failing to properly cite your source, falls foul of the plagiarism rule. Please do not do this again.

Yes, there's a specific prerequisite for a planet bearing life. Which explains why there are countless planets that we've seen that don't. That's not proof of design. at least not intelligent design. Did the creator just try and fail multi trillions of times, and finally succeed at this one? Eventually he got one right. Congrats. We see a lot of failed attempts, though.

A single cell is a modern evolutionary development. The early earth didn't have single cells. There were much more primitive things at the beginning. Even the simplest things we find today are a product millions of years in the making. The more complex somethign is, the more an indication that it wasn't designed. Or that it was designed very poorly.

The Human body is poorly designed. We have a quadrupedal skeleton while trying to walk upright. We have one tube for both digestion and breathing, with just a flap in between. we have several organs that will most likely need to be removed in our lifetimes so they don't cause lethal complications. Our children are born underdeveloped so that childbirth is even possible.

You don't need a "purposer" to have a purpose. Things that lack a purpose tend to die off, thus leaving only things that have beneficial or neutral effects.

Don't start with the watchmaker argument. Watches don't happen in nature. Neither do heads on mountains, though there are some things found in nature that look like they were created by someone. Humans love finding patterns, and they think this pattern couldn't come by change or natural effect. Except everything we've ever had a provable explanation for has been explained by natural processes.

DNA, like cells, are a modern development of something more primitive. It wasn't around in the beginning.

The odds are small, which is why it hasn't happened everywhere, but it did happen. If you have a deck of cards, you will eventually draw a royale flush. the odds are small, btu the more you try, the chances are you'll eventually get it. That doesn't mean some third party dictated you would get the royale flush. It just means anything that is possible will eventually happen.

If the universe really was designed, it wasn't intelligently.


Also it's not a good sign when you copy/paste answers from other places. Even if you want to cite a source, at least put it in your own words. There's an assumption that we would be debating YOU. Not some other article writer you googled.