This dual extension is entirely consistent with the approach to hypothesis testing most widely employed in the applied statistics literature, and certainly the first one taught in any introductory statistics course. I cite these technical considerations to indicate that any substantive worry about specified complexity has to lie elsewhere. Such diversity of formulations is fully to be expected given the diversity of approaches to statistical decision theory. Consequently, the concept of specified complexity is likely to undergo considerable fine-tuning and reformulation in coming years. Here's the worry.
Specified complexity is a statistical notion.
Design, as generally understood, is a causal notion. First I offer an inductive argument, showing that in all cases where we know the causal story and specified complexity was involved, that an intelligence was involved also. The inductive generalization that follows is that all cases of specified complexity involve intelligence. Next I argue that choice is the defining feature of intelligence and that specified complexity is how in fact we identify choice. Although I regard these two arguments as utterly convincing, others regard them as less so.