It is an argument from ignorance. “I don’t know or understand, therefore, God.”

Also Aquinas: Catholicism is TRUE! Gimme a minute and I'll search for proof and present it to you whilst I ignore any evidence to the contrary.

Ol' Tommy specialized in inductive arguments, not deductive. His reasoning was based on experiences. It's not a matter of “if your premises are true and the structure is valid, then the conclusion is true”. Quite the opposite because in this case he and his apologist non-thinkers are making an inductive inference that can't be justified, meaning they go beyond the scope of the experience they claim. The inference to the best explanation, a god/gods, isn't reasonable.

Complexity isn't indicative of design. Simplicity is. Intelligent designers do things the easiest way possible, not the most complicated. They certainly wouldn't have flaws where doing things like breathing and eating are so interconnected you can die from it. Many other animals don't, but we can.

The other terms- listen to a physicist discuss the boiling brew that's the vacuum of space. Nothing about that sounds orderly or regular. Quasars and black hole collisions don't sound purposeful do they, as in someone guided them together? Designed for life? The matter that makes life, baryonic matter makes up less than 5% of all there is, and most of that is stellar clouds of materials. What's left is stars, and way way down the line is the leftovers that allow for planets and things like organisms. A paltry, shatteringly insignificant percentage.

The teleological argument is essentially based on reverse logic. It shoots an arrow and draws circles around it, then claims “I have hit the bullseye.”

Teleological argument relies on the weak probabilities of life emerging (honestly we DON'T the number) and concludes “if it is too low, then it must have been tuned by someone.”

The problem here is, as I stated before, reverse logic. Past determines the present, the present does not determine the past but the teleological argument determines the past from present. It looks at present, analyses the past judging from present and concludes the past occurred so that the present may take place in this way whereas the present emerged because of past occurring in that way. It analyses backwards. Just apply it to throwing an arrow, drawing circles around where it hit(Point A) and claiming you hit the bullseye. If you analyze it backwards, the chances of the arrow hitting Point A will be so weak that it must have been finely tuned so that it can hit the Point A.

The arrow analogy really hits the mark.

Huh?

It's a pun.

No what does the analogy mean

It illustrates how religion starts with the conclusion and works backwards to justify it instead of starting with a hypothesis and then observing whether data supports or refutes it.

Ok hypothesis God exists, we know that the universe began, and that something had to Kickstart it, you know what I'll let you continue

The universe was farted out of the anus of an interdimensional being whose nature we can only speculate at because we are limited to 4 dimensions.

Evidence:
1) the observable universe is comprised mostly of gas
2) the being was so embarrassed by its flatulent expulsion that it fled the scene, which is why we haven't detected it directly.
3) existence stinks

I didn't need 4000 years to put my theory together. I pulled it out of my ass just now, and I submit that as far as science is concerned it holds together just as well as Christianity's explanation of how the universe started.

Any proof of the beings existence maybe ancient texts that interconnect

The ancient pyramids found the world over are more compelling evidence of a creator entity, except they do more to support the hypothesis that neolithic human progress was influenced by aliens than by the Christian sky father. Anyone can cobble together a tome of stories and convince a critical mass of people to pay attention to it. Most people on the NY Times best seller list pull that off. Building pyramids is too sophisticated and time-consuming to be a prank for lols or mere instrument through which to exert control over other people.

Any aliens capable of traveling to Earth could also be advanced enough to do all sorts of things we can't fathom. Maybe they created our universe. The possibility certainly can't be ruled out.

I like this hypothesis because it keeps humanity at the center of the cosmic narrative, just like Christianity, so it makes it easier to assess them side by side.

Yes?