"Except for possible exception of a couple evangelistic atheists , the design argument is from the creationist side . It is pretty old being first stated by William Paley . Darwin respected Paley and thought his arguments beautiful until he actually started looking at reality ( Darwin also lived in that same rooms at Christ 's College , Cambridge that Paley did ) . The argument from design is presented as `` proof `` of God or an `` intelligent `` designer for those who want to pretend that intelligent design creationism ins't creationism . But the argument on the other side is that it is flawed design and therefore is n't `` proof `` . Evolutionary biologists do n't assert that there is not god , only that there is no evidence from nature that there is one . Science is naturalistic . Even if some scientists ( and others ) are philosophical naturalists , science does n't work that way . It is methodological naturalism simply because there are no tools by which science can examine or quantify the supernatural . It sounds silly when some claim that scientists are wrong when they fail to consider the supernatural in naturalism ."
"If we were to debate whether God made us perfect as he could have , then of course we can make the point that he obviously does n't exist ."
"The argument from design is presented as `` proof `` of God . Evolutionary biologists do n't assert that there is not , only that there is no evidence from nature that there is one"
"If we were to debate whether God made us perfect as he could have , then of course we can make the point that he obviously does n't exist ."