I am over-focused on truth, reality, logic, and reason. My specific focus in that remark was: Don't make false statements, and no, it's not OK to make false statements just because you're trying to be creative.
Since the data indicates that randomness is not a probably answer, then the right direction is most likely in some direction other than randomness.
Yeah, you're right. That direction appears to be evolution, which isn't random.
That suggests purposefulness and design....thence, intelligent design.
No, it doesn't. And even if it did, panspermia is still not a theory of intelligent design and the only religions that I'm aware of that attributed the development of life to "collective consciousness" were a few Native American legends, and they did not specify anything "intelligently designed"..
Hypothetically, as if you were concerned with answering the question, What would YOU speculate as the source of the intelligent design?
If life on Earth is the product of intelligent design, then some kind of transcendent deity is almost certainly the designer.
The problem, of course, is that our experience limits our speculations.
Yes, that is a problem, but the main problem is that there's no evidence of intelligent design, deities, extraterrestrial seeding, or an entity of collective consciousness.
We would disagree on the randomness that's a necessity of the evolution model.
Also, there's plenty of evidence of a deity. So far as our worldview imposing limitations of our ability to speculate, it's a given in many other disciplines. Therefore, it makes sense here.
Just so I know where you're coming from: Using standard definitions, I am a religious person (see my tagline.) Are you?