What's the lamest defence of Theism you've ever heard?

[AAA]

Apart from the obvious logical inconsistencies of fine tuning, of course. I don't want to bring up the puddle as an argument of parsimony but fine tuning has been debunked so many times it's not even fun anymore.

And, AAA, if I may, you've still not explained away the argument from incredulity. I believe you may have misappropriated the 'I don't know argument' by adding an additional condition of 'it's certainly not that, but what it is I don't know.'

And before equivocating that argument and a prima facie similarity of the rejection of God theses, I have to say that abiogenesis and evolution beyond do have a wealth of evidence to support them. The creator thesis has only one; personal anecdote and belief.

I'm not even going to argue that you are wrong. I just don't see any reason beyond your belief to believe you are right.

Ok, then why don't you believe in Design. You are arguing from incredulity because you just can't understand how it happened. Do you see why this is a stupid argument? It's not like I just don't know how it could have evolved, but others do. It is that we do know how it functions, and it parallels a superior system that we may design. They do not have a wealth of evidence to support them. I want you to explain the evidence for how evolution accounts for the origin for one protein. Be careful not to go beyond the evidence or use suppositions and excessive imagination. Tell me why you intuitively think this was not designed. These are biochemical pathways with enzymes at each step: