The teleological argument is evidence of a designer deity.

I will address your misunderstanding of Albert Einstein first. The subtext of my opponents Einstein quote is: "Einstein believed in God." This is just simple sophistry. Einstein is well known for using the term 'god' metaphorically. This squabbling about Einstein may seem trite, but it's important as he is regularly misrepresented. I will leave this lengthy quote by Einstein that will, no doubt, refute any more issues in this particular area. " I came"though the child of entirely irreligious (Jewish) parents"to a deep religiousness, which, however, reached an abrupt end at the age of twelve. Through the reading of popular scientific books I soon reached the conviction that much in the stories of the Bible could not be true. The consequence was a positively fanatic orgy of freethinking coupled with the impression that youth is intentionally being deceived by the state through lies; it was a crushing impression. Mistrust of every kind of authority grew out of this experience, a skeptical attitude toward the convictions that were alive in any specific social environment"an attitude that has never again left me, even though, later on, it has been tempered by a better insight into the causal connections. It is quite clear to me that the religious paradise of youth, which was thus lost, was a first attempt to free myself from the chains of the 'merely personal,' from an existence dominated by wishes, hopes, and primitive feelings. Out yonder there was this huge world, which exists independently of us human beings and which stands before us like a great, eternal riddle, at least partially accessible to our inspection and thinking. The contemplation of this world beckoned as a liberation, and I soon noticed that many a man whom I had learned to esteem and to admire had found inner freedom and security in its pursuit. The mental grasp of this extra-personal world within the frame of our capabilities presented itself to my mind, half consciously, half unconsciously, as a supreme goal. Similarly motivated men of the present and of the past, as well as the insights they had achieved, were the friends who could not be lost. The road to this paradise was not as comfortable and alluring as the road to the religious paradise; but it has shown itself reliable, and I have never regretted having chosen it." Refutation (1): Physical evidence "All creation points to a creator." This is important and I also agree with this statement. However, the creator does not always have to be a deity or a human. Creation is a vague term that can be applied to a lot of things. The Grand Canyon was a creation of nature that took millions of years to form. Every mountain you see is created by the clashing of tectonic plates in the Earth's crust. No human or deity needed to interfere with these processes because we can definitively prove how and when these events took place. I can also use that to point to the universe as a creation by the scientific theory known as the big bang. I don't wish to debate the big bang in this though, so that's all I will say on that. Refutation (2): Psychological evidence Not going to spend too much time on this one. The question of extraterrestrial life is one that is answered with mathematical probability. In this vast observable universe, astronomers estimate there are about 100 billion galaxies. So, probability would dictate that the odds of some of those planets in those galaxies containing intelligent life is pretty high. Refutation (3): Designer deity and science Nicholas Copernicus (born 1473), Galileo Galilei (born 1564), Issac Newton (born 1643), Michael Farady (born 1791), and Gregor Mendel (born 1822). All of these men lived in times where Christianity was rampant in the areas they lived and not believing in a designer deity (more specifically, the Christian God) could mean death. In fact, most of these men were deists. Meaning they did not believe in a personal God, but lived in a time where deism was the only scientifically rational position to uphold given the lack of astrophysical evidence at the time. Personal beliefs can never be evidence towards anything, let alone a designer of the cosmos. "Science and Religion are not mutually exclusive." Okay, let's look at this with a little scrutiny. Science: the systematic study of the nature and behavior of the material and physical universe, based on observation, experiment, and measurement, and the formulation of laws to describe these facts in general terms. Religion: a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects. Basically, Science is concerned with what is true and what is observable within the universe. Through the scientific method of purpose, research, hypothesis, experiment, analysis, and conclusion. Science is always subject to change, the "theories" are always subject to change based on evidence. Religion however, is a rigid set of truth claims that is not subject to change. If science formulates a theory (i.e. evolution), religion either has to deny the evidence or change the meaning of their scripture to fit within the parameters of the theory. Religion and Science are mutually exclusive because they're two entirely different sects of academic thought. Sources: http://www.skyandtelescope.com... http://dictionary.reference.com... http://dictionary.reference.com...