Debate: Does God really Exist???
Side: NOPE

The sieve was created to sort small rocks from big rocks in the first place. Selection happens because something decided to selcet or as you argue shake tue sieve. It doesn't shake itself and it didn't create itself. I don't believe there is random selection it seems like that would contradict itself would it not? The sieve represents selection, and as selection is a process and not a physical manmade item like an actual sieve, it does not need to be 'created', nor does it need an external force to make it happen. It is simply the natural result of life. However, selection is blind, but it is not random, so while 'random selection' is not exactly an oxymoron, it does not apply. The organisms best suited to their survival, the ones who can go without food for the longest, the fastest, the best breeders, etc. are the ones that get to pass on more of their superior genetics to the next generation. It is simple and elegant, and there is no other way it can be. Getting it not to happen would be the truly impressive feat. Of course it takes more intelligence to create in the first place. Dna is a code and therefore could not be random.Again, there is an element of randomness of evolution, but it is expressed as mutations, and is only one mechanism for evolution. The things that work get to live, and the things that don't will die. This is not random, this is simply mechanics. No one is suggesting DNA evolved randomly. Perhaps that is how it came into being in the first place, but evolution does not care about the origin of life, only what came after, and what came after was the gradual evolution of chains of acids into something that resembled DNA. The computer analogy actually has some relevance. In the first place how was the computer made? The parts were brought together.No, it doesn't. As an argument for creationism or ID, the comparison of machines to humans is a poor one, because it begs the question of creationism. The computer was assembled as is from preexisting parts; it has no history of genetic ancestors that, over millions of years, adapted to something like its modern form. For humans, the opposite is true; humans, as individuals and as a species, were not assembled fully-formed from a box of organs and limbs. We gradually evolved from a simple organism into a complex one. In my opinion dna proves intelligence. Not to say it is intelligent. Again I am under the impression that species were coded to stay the same in the first place. If nature was truly random and things fromed randomly in the first place, there would be nothing to say that something that starts as a tiger would not breed a lion or an ant or any other thing because their dna could randomly turn into that thing. Could it not?You seem to have strange ideas about what role randomness plays in evolution. It is impossible for the genes of one species to recombine into the genes of a completely different species; this is not a miracle, or a work of some intelligent force, it is just another thing that could be no other way. You can't use the recipe for an apple pie to make a chocolate cake. If two tigers mated and gave birth to an ant...well, that would be the most convincing evidence for ID that I have ever seen, and everything we know about evolution and genetics would be shot to hell.