I observed their derivation. My family owns manufacturing plants.
Did you have to see someone designing and building them to know it did not design and assemble itself?
I had to at least see a representation thereof. All my observation since has confirmed the representation.
If you saw a hammer for the first time, and were not told that someone had to fashion that hammer, would you assume it is a product of natural selection and random mutation or other "natural forces" devoid of intelligence?
You mean, if I saw a hammer today for the first time? The answer to your question would then be no. I would surely recognize it as technology and I know where technology originates.
PS. I am starting to get the distinct impression that you value your time far less than I value mine. ;)
So then, may I assume that in each case where you've come across a man-made object and understood it to be such, you accept it as "man-made" because you've seen it manufactured before, and therefore know it is designed? This is the only evidence that would convince you of intelligent design? I don't think so. I would like to know what properties of an object lead you to conclude intelligent design was involved with it's existence.
I am starting to get the distinct impression that you value your time far less than I value mine.
I happen to be persistent. I also wish to ask simple questions in order to understand where you are coming from. The time spent in dialogue with you has been valuable indeed, but worth it.
Bingo!