The universe was probably created by an Intelligent Designer.

"The word "universe" is defined, in essence, as everything in existence. Everything." Not necessarily. The universe can be defined as mass and energy. The attribute of intelligence and will can very much be something beyond mass and energy. In addition, I am referring to the universe as we understand it now. Thus, it is also possible that this Intelligent Designer could have existed in a way we cannot attribute to our understanding of this universe. Remember that I also touched upon the design of natural forces and what we study as physics as a product of this design. "In order for something which designed the universe to exist, it would have to design itself, which is impossible as it's existence cannot predate it's design unless it is possible for something of enough complexity to design it to exist without being designed, which your argument denies in assigning design to a necessary condition of complexity. In other words, contradiction..." Or a flawed premise on your part. The intelligent force need not exist within time, or does it need to continue to exist after the creation of this universe. If we associate the beginning of time with the beginning of the universe, we can then say that this intelligent force exists outside of time, designed the universe, and continues to exist outside time since it is not of physical substance. Alternatively, we can also say that this being existed in an alternate state, designed the universe, and ceased existing once time and the universe came into being. "Beyond that, our universe contains quadrillions of stars. Many of which we don't know much about. Of the ones we do know about, none are apparently capable of supporting life except one in our system. One of nine in our system. The rest, with the possible exception of Mars, support no life. But they are nevertheless very complex. A designer with the goal of life in mind would not commit such a grievous sin against it's purpose as to waste it's time. Unless you are talking about another end for your annoying impish universal intelligence?" Recognizing the products of intelligence is different from being able to distinguish purpose. While we can adequately understand that things are more than the product of random chance, as they exhibit order and complexity, we cannot assume purpose because that assumption is tainted by our social habits. Your notion that time/energy is wasted is only connected with the assumption that this intelligent designer shares certain human characteristics. However, with the notion that this intelligent designer is (by our standards) omnipotent and exists outside the realm of time, your argument that the more "unimportant" creations are a waste is irrelevant. "On another level, your argument that it "must be" designed because it is complex, quite simply, does not follow from any logic. Just because a designer would make something complex does not mean that something complex has to be designed, to think it does is affirming the antecedent." That is not the logical structure of my argument. My argument is that observed complexity equates with a decreased probability of no intelligent influence. I then derive the notion that the observed complexity of the universe is so great that the probability of there being no intelligent influence is similarly low. "Nothing about the quality of random chance has been demonstrated to limit itself to simple outcomes, indeed, quantum physics relies on random chance and yet is highly complex." This analogy is lacking. Quantum physics OPERATES via random chance and is highly complex AS A THEORY. The corrected analogy would be the probability of a man devising the concepts of quantum physics randomly, which is absurd. "Poker is complex precisely because there is so much random chance involved, with so many different factors, and it makes it harder to design a strategy to beat it." Again, this analogy is lacking, it is rigged. This example illustrates the usage of intelligence to overcome factors of random chance. The complexity is derived from a goal (overcoming randomness) and not from the intrinsic nature of poker. A corrected analogy would be chess, which is a game that is observably complex. What is the probability of devising a chess strategy of random moves and win? "Indeed, the more complex it gets, the less likely something is to be designed, because for one thing it gets harder to rack up the kind of intelligence necessary to design it, and for another much of the complexity out there is either useless or even counter to any possible design." I don't see the logic in this rebuttal. First of all, this argument only goes to show that the intelligent designer must be of infinite intelligence. Second, the only way your argument can make sense is if you assume that the act of the intelligent designer designing the universe was somehow an act that can be reduced to probability. This is begging the question. "Why would a designer leave comets lying about to knock into it's creation? Why would a designer make murderers? Does it like murderers? Then why would it make police? Too much conflict for any smart designer, and too much complexity for a stupid one. Either way it doesn't compute." There are the constructs of the designer and there are constructs of man. Events of man such as murder, the relaying of justice, or even comets colliding are of no great consequence to a being of infinite intelligence that exists outside time or not at all. These are simply not issue of concern for the designer and are only important because they relate with human life. The only point of importance is that we are able to understand and perceive intelligence and its forms and evidence of its existence in the universe. ***************** My argument for Intelligent Design of the universe is echoed throughout the internet. The universe operates like clockwork, in recognizable patterns. Our very existence is the result of extremely specific and highly improbably if not impossible circumstances.