[joseph20]

Who designed the aliens is irrelevant to the original point.

He says that he sees intelligent design in our DNA. This designer could just as easily be aliens as it could be god.

[AmericaUnited]

He says that he sees intelligent design in our DNA. This designer could just as easily be aliens as it could be god.

It's the MAGNITUDE of the intelliegnce that gives the clue, just like you "deduct" that it must have been a Monet who painted a picture vs some 6 year old.

[GAB-1955]

Actually, it’s not irrelevant at all. Even if our life were created by some other forms of life, that form of life had to be started somewhere, either by spontaneous natural phenomena or by the act of intelligence that does not belong to this universe. There has to be a first cause, or no cause at all.

Philosophy questions are never trivial. How you see the universe directs what you do.

[MrB]

But it is still breaking down the wall of the

“no intelligence allowed” crowd.

[Westbrook]

> Who designed the aliens is irrelevant to the original
> point.

It *IS* the original point.

Evidence of design is evidence of a designer.

Your hypothetical aliens would serve to present even more evidence of design and a transcendent Designer.

I submit that there is a lot more evidence for a Transcendent Designer than there is for aliens.

[fightinJAG]

It’s not just “intelligent” design, there is a moral component to the design of the universe, including the design of human beings.

So the creator of DNA exercised some sort of moral judgment in that creation, selecting one path over others as the way to create a design that had not only intelligent function, but which functioned morally as well.

Therefore, the creator perforce has a superior moral capacity to his creation. And, obviously, superior power.

What is your definition of a god, for starters?