Intelligent Design

[AAA]

No I can't prove they were designed, but they share features with things that we know only arise from intelligent designer, such as interacting parts that work together to achieve a goal, and a specific sequence that holds information. Therefore I think the default conclusion should be that it was designed.

Can you prove that a designer is required for interacting parts to work together? I don't think you can, therefore your answer should default to "I don't know". If you are going to be a scientist, it's guaranteed you will not get far in any respectable scientific circles when you can't be that honest regarding what you do and don't know.

Can you prove that they evolved? No, there is no observable evidence that can be presented to prove either side. We have to compare the thing that we are trying to explain (a chemical code that produces a desired effect) based on our experience of such a phenomenon.

Bullshit - the evidence is all over the fossil record and heavily evident in genetic studies! Fossil evidence proves that life has progressed over 4 billion years from ultra-simple to very complex, and genetic studies prove the degree to which genes of a given species are related to their most similar cousin species - take your head out of your ass and google it for yourself!

It is true that I don't know for sure, but I'm not claiming that I am 100% correct, I am just claiming that the appearance of design is best explained by an intelligent agent. I don't know for sure, but neither do you.

The fossil record represents more of a stasis of organisms than smooth transitions or change. Many organisms are alive today that are exactly the same as they were millions of years ago. Also don't say that there has ever been an ultra-simple life form found. There is nothing simple about any living organism. Scientists estimate that the simplest organisms would need to have around 270 genes in order to survive, and these are the low estimates. Genetic evidence doesn't necessarily support evolution either. Yes some things are more similar to each other than other things. Any time you compare more than two things, some of them will be more similar than others. It is a far stretch to say that this means they descended from a common ancestor or that one descended from the other. You would expect organisms with similar phenotypes to have more similar genotypes. This does not prove common ancestor or neo-Darwinian evolution.

Also stromatalites, which are the earliest fossil evidence of life to my knowledge are the same structures that are produced by organisms still alive today. The microbes that produce them today are exceedingly complex, which again should lead to the conclusion that the first life was exceedingly complex.