I thought the debate was really dumbed down from both sides, but the argument creationists make overall is inarguable.
How can trillions of pieces perfectly fitted together producing trillions of functional outputs on this planet (life as we know it) not be a 'design?' As I keep saying, it's order vs chaos, and if you choose chaos, you're choosing infinitesimal odds. Call it what you will, I call atheism 'faith' -- faith in a theory that defies every law in the universe.
Truthfully, most arguments atheists make against 'God' aren't scientific at all, as we witness every time this topic is debated. Questions like, "if God exists, why is there so much suffering?" Or, "why did my mother die of cancer at 38?" Etc. Those aren't 'scientific ' questions, they are spiritual struggles. After all, most atheists are very hostile and angry when debating this topic. And it's easy to understand why. I think the hostility toward the concept of 'God' comes from those who preach (sometimes kill in the name of) one God over another, or advocate one set of values over another. Just remember the gun rule: Guns don't kill people, people kill people. God doesn't preach, people preach. God doesn't kill in the name of God, people do. In any case, most questions atheists have about 'God' aren't 'scientific' at all.
My point is, religion and the concept of infinite intelligence are not synonymous. The former is faith, the later is based on logic. I'm sure the 'science' will one day catch up -- just as it surely will discover how to bend time and travel through different dimensions.
Personally, when I try to wrap my mind around the concept of a higher intelligence, I picture myself trying to teach a cockroach the periodic table. It's a very humbling and overwhelming experience but I think it sums up the feeble argument atheists make of trying to "prove God" -- as if God is going to reveal himself to all humanity with our current level of understanding and technology.
Science can't even understand gravity -- much less manipulate it -- cure the common cold, leave our solar system, or predict the weather. In the 70s, they were telling us the planet was going to freeze over, now they tell us it's going to fry. Why on earth would I place my 'faith' (and make no mistake about, it is 'faith') in something so primitive when wrestling with the concept of a higher intelligence? Doesn't make sense. When it came to the best inventions, inspiration has always led the way and the science usually followed -- not the other way around.
Start with the basic precept that there is a higher intelligence. Why? Because order and chaos are not compatible. It's one or the other. I choose order. Where that precept takes each intellectually and spiritually curious individual is a topic beyond the scope of this debate.
