The argument is: Complex things require creators. The universe is so complex that it requires a creator.
However, if complex things can't arise without a creator from simpler things, then the creator must be more complex than the created thing. But that beggars the question: How did the creator come to be? The usual answer is that the creator "just is". Even as a child I thought that was a silly answer, on part with "Because I said so!"
Science has always struck me not as having all the answers but as being a process that eventually comes closer and closer to having answers that are accurate enough to be verifiable and be predictive. As far as the fossil record being incomplete, that is true. However, it is FAR more complete than some folks (including the OP) give it credit for. Whenever someone claims that no one has found the "missing link" between a predecessor species and an successor species, the fact is that there are usually several such examples showing intermediary speciation.
Oh well. You can't convince some folks. Some folks see ships disappearing below the horizon and the seeming flatness of the land around them as proof positive that the world is flat.
|