Similarly, suppose a technological object is found on Mars. In that case, it will be immediately apparent that an intelligent entity designed it, even if we have never seen how such an item is made.
Clear intuition obviates the need for direct experience or analogy to familiar objects. And as stated above, experience teaches us about the rule that every complex object we know is intelligently created, and we have no experience that shows the opposite example.
One can doubt this intuition, but as long as there is no particular reason to deny it, it certainly makes sense to trust it and deduce from it the existence of a planner, just as we rely on intuition in many other areas. Another direction of critique argues that evolution refutes the argument of design because it shows how complex beings can emerge from a simple process of mutations and natural selection, without the need for a planner.
But even if we assume that all the complexities that exist in nature can be created in this way (which is not clear at all and even seems unreasonable), evolution does not refute the argument of planning at all but only takes the question one step back: what explains the existence of the universe?
Let’s consider life and all of the processes leading to it. This is similar to someone who claims that the watch was not built by a human watchmaker but was created on an automatic production line in a factory without human contact. Of course, the conclusion is not that the clock was not designed, but that the factory and the production line were designed to create clocks.
Scientifically, since the conditions necessary for the appearance of life are so precise, the entire universe must be tuned with unimaginable precision from the most basic level of the laws of nature to have the potential for the appearance of life (the so-called “fine-tuning”). This is, therefore, strong evidence that it was indeed designed intelligently for this purpose.
