It is easy to say this in so many words, but isn't this really nothing
more than a statement of your religious faith?  I mean really, I can
say, based on the current evidence that we have available to us, that
an honest investigation of our universe will only detail an ultimate
creative Intelligence/God in a clearer and clearer way.  Certainly the
great weight of current evidence already speaks overwhelmingly in
favor of an incredible intelligence behind what we see in this
universe - especially when we look at living things.

Now this is a falsifiable statement.  All you have to do to prove me
wrong is to show me where material in this universe organizes itself
very far beyond the lowest levels of functional/informational
complexity without the existence and assistance of pre-established
complexity at that level or greater.  If you do this, I will become
like you are.  So far though, I have only been able to see  matter
organize itself only slightly beyond its original level of functional
complexity if and only if it started out at a very low level of
complexity.  Going from a higher level of complexity to a brand new
kind of function at that level or greater simply doesn't happen in
this universe.

For example, evolution can happen between 3-letter words very easily
because, although they do carry a fairly high degree of specificity,
they are coded for by a relatively short sequence of letters.  This
creates a ratio of meaningful vs. meaningless of about 1 in 7
potential 3-letter words in the English language system. But what if
the minimum sequence requirement for a particular function was
7-letters?  Now the ratio of all 7-letter sequences to include 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, and 6 letter words is around 1 in 250,000.  Getting from one
meaningful 7-letter phrase to a different meaningful 7-letter phrase
requires, on average, a fairly long random walk through 250,000
meaningless options.  The evolution between 7-letter phrases slows
down significantly when compared to the evolution between 3-letter
phrases.

Just try a little experiment yourself.  Start with a short 2 or
3-letter word and see how many words you can evolve that require
greater and greater minimum sequence requirements.  No doubt you will
quickly find yourself coming to walls of meaningless or non-beneficial
potential options that separate you from every other meaningful and
beneficial option.   Now, the only way to get to a new meaningful much
less beneficial option is to cross the meaningless/non-beneficial gap
of separation. Random walk is all that you have to cross such a gap
and that is a big big problem (Genetic evolution works the very same
way).

Without some sort of outside pre-established guidance, such a random
walk quickly works itself into the trillions upon trillions of years
of average time at fairly low levels of specified complexity.  Natural
selection is no help here since nature cannot tell the difference
between equally non-meaningful/non-beneficial options.  Nature only
recognizes meaningful changes in the function or expressed information
content of a change in the code that caries that information.  Such a
process of random evolution has even been given a name called,
"Neutral Evolution".  Again, the problem is that neutral evolution
doesn't make new functions; it only makes new meaningless phrases.

No one understands how QV could have created the big bang.  It isn't
even a testable hypothesis much less a theory of origins.  Certainly
you cannot explain this concept nor can you propose any other purely
natural non-intelligent process to explain what we see in this
universe.

Again, there are only two options:  An Eternal Pre-existing Creative
Intelligence vs. All Other Non-intelligent Creative Processes.

So far, the evidence is clearly in favor of the intelligent design
option for everything in this universe because the other option simply
has no evidence beyond the very lowest levels of
functional/informational complexity.  Many people confuse chaos with
complexity here, but this is not the form of complexity that I am
talking about in the present sense.  Informational complexity is far
different from chaos or chaotic complexity.  Again, informational
complexity simply does not come about beyond the lowest levels of
complexity without the input of pre-established informational
complexity that is at or above the level of complexity found within a
newly formed system of complexity.

That is how we can tell if something was intelligently designed or
not.  The detection of intelligent activity is dependent upon two
things.  In order to detect intelligence one must first be aware of
the potential of intelligence at a certain level or beyond.  But, this
knowledge alone is not enough to clearly detect the workings of
intelligence.  For example, if I were to go out to the desert around
where I live and find an amorphous rock on the ground, could I
automatically and reasonable assume intelligent design as the origin
for the form of this rock?  Certainly not even though it could have
been intelligently and deliberately formed.  Certainly its form is not
beyond the abilities of human intelligence to create - right?
However, I also know that its form is not beyond the abilities of
mindless non-deliberate processes to create as well.  So, in order to
detect the workings of high intelligence without a doubt, I must not
only know the potential of such levels of intelligence, I must also
have some idea of the limits of mindless non-directed non-intelligent
processes.

For example, if I walk by a house in the morning and find a window
broken I can rationally assume either a mindless or mindful cause for
that broken window as both processes could give rise to such a
phenomenon.  However, if I were to walk by this same house in the
evening and find that this window had been fixed, could I rationally
assume anything other than a mindful cause?

The same is true of any other phenomenon.  If a given phenomenon goes
significantly beyond anything that any mindless processes has ever
done without the input of higher pre-established information in the
form of a mind or pre-established order, I can effectively rule out a
mindless cause for its origin.  Then, since a mindful cause can indeed
explain many phenomena that mindless causes cannot explain, it is
perfectly reasonable to invoke a mindful cause as involved with the
production of such phenomena.

That is because life simply does not evolve without a higher
intelligence or order creating it.  Life doesn't exist on the very
very few other planets that we have been able to explore because it
wasn't created there like it was created here.  It is as simple as
that.  Certainly some of these other sterile planets could support
life it were put there, but life isn't going to evolve there even if
it would thrive there because the level of complexity found even
within the most simple living thing is way beyond anything that can be
assembled without the input of high intelligence.  Even here on Earth
life does not evolve beyond its lowest levels of complexity.  The
reason why there is only one intelligence on Earth at the level of
humans is because humans were the only ones designed with such a high
level of intelligence.  A universe perfectly balanced to *support*
life does not mean that this universe can *create* life or even new
forms of life beyond its lowest levels of functional complexity.  The
Anthropic Universe is just able to support life once it is created,
that is all. It is not the Creator; it is the created.

For those who are interested, I detail to a much greater degree my
views on the abilities and limits of mindless vs. mindful processes
at:

www.naturalselection.0catch.com

Sean