Is there a legitimate argument for design?

How do you know?

Hi Omnivorous,Crows have also been observed casting hard nuts onto the busy road to have cars smash them. Then they fly down and eat them.Using us humans as a makeshift nutcracker.

Avian intelligence continually amazes me. Here is a photo of my two family members. (Both bred in captivity)Your story of Manitou is wonderful.

Hello NoNukes, I hate that saying, "it is what it is." That has become so popular in discussions.I am reminded of my young daughter who always seems to have a "but why" at the end of every answer.Inevitably I have to say, " I don't know." It is what it is.
But what a boring world we would live in if we knew everything.The discovery of the Higgs was one of the most amazing achievments but it seems to have only opened the door to more questions, more but why? Why is the Higgs in the middle between a universe that may someday be explained or to one that is arbitrary. The mystery continues, the final answer postponed yet again.
We can choose to believe there is a reson de entre' or we can simply say it is what it is.
I tend to flip back and forth depending on my mood that day.

But wHy???Ok that is a third option. One that seems to be in line with "it is what it is." It is what is because we don't know yet what it is or why it is.The natural laws of the universe operate in the way they do and exist the way they do because we do not know yet.Edited by 1.61803, : redundant

Hello Taiji2, This is a appeal to popularity argument. Lets do that. How would you define design as and what evidence would you present.
Unless you are using your atom is complex therefore is designed
argument. Because it was refuted by NoNukes stating the atom is not complex. So you could perhaps come up with a complex system that could not possibly be non designed. Like the Rhodopsin cycle of the human eye, or the Kreb cycle.
Which NoNukes refuted that complexity is also not a adequate evidence of design.
So how about Goddidit? This requires no evidence. Just faith and belief. But that is for another forum other than Science que no?

My argument for design :
There is no underlying truth or reality, it is what it is. The Universe and humanity exist in the software of a alien super intelligent artificial sentient lifeform for the soul purpose of entertainment. It is a highly complex programming masterpiece.
The game is self running and models the cosmos completely.
It can not be predicted or understood because the operating parameters have been left out by the designers. The game resets after all available energy reaches maximum entropy.
Many of the underlying mechanisms of how the game manifest reality seem to point to various themes and overtime seem to merge into one unique principal of operation. But several key bits of information simply do not exist in this game and therefore it is unsolvable.

Perhaps, but I tend to look at things from a human point of view. Being that I am human. In terms of operation? Then does that not imply a operator? (kidding) Not sure what you mean, I'll guess you mean that I am guilty of perhaps thinking of "natural laws" as "things" when they are simply the way physics happens and physics is the lingusitic description/representation of those phenomenon. Regardless the constants and laws that have been discovered do not need to make any sense at all. Humans are the ones that tend to look for symmetry, patterns and significance. At least I do. The universe could care less.Edited by 1.61803, : spelling.