Is There "Intellegent Design" In The Universe Or Not?

This debate that's been going on, of whether all things that exist have intelligent design behind them or not, is in my opinion, one of the most ridiculous arguments that has ever surfaced.

There have been a number of televised debate segments on news shows, that have opponents from each side of the debate, stating reasons for each. They act as if it is all a matter of personal belief, that determines what people actually accept on this matter, when in reality, there logically can be no argument, even from a common sense perspective and yet there is!

HERE'S WHY IN MY OPINION: In order to take intelligent design out of all things that exist, you must believe in a global and universal system of "chance happenings". In other words, all things literally happened by accident and they continue to maintain by accident. It might be reasonable to believe in chance happenings, on a small scale but when you look at the whole picture, it is so astronomically impossible for tens of thousands of things to have come into existence and to maintain by chance happening, there is not even a number in existence that can calculate such odds. Even if one wants to exclude belief in God as Creator from the picture, they still cannot get around "intelligent design", even if they choose to call it by the name "evolution" or "mother nature", "the universal consciousness" etc... because otherwise, you have no choice left but to say that there is some type of "inherent intelligence", actually built into the cells of all living things. The problem with this theory, is that it takes you right back to attributing some type of force of intelligent design to all things that exist!

Not only are there millions of unique and different living things in existence, but also the proper foods, atmosphere, intelligence and instinct to maintain these living things, the proper atmosphere to sustain them, a food-chain system to keep balance in nature, a solar system so intricate that even minute changes in it would destroy all life on the planet, earth rotation that is specific for gravity and change of seasons needed to continue life-cycles. There is also beauty and fragrance on the planet, which for practical purposes-only, should not exist at all if chance happening is the explanation. In fact it would not make sense for animals of any kind to have emotional qualities at all, in a chance-happening world. Are emotions such as love and joy also accidents? Pro-creation does not require anything other than instinct if it is for practical purposes only. Things such as pride in Country and desire to defend family and country should also not exist. Education itself would need to be declared "non-intelligent", otherwise you must believe there is an origin for it.

What this debate actually amounts to, is "semantics" , in other words, playing games with the meanings of words, in attempt to change meanings. It is also an attempt at "hyper-philosophy", meaning you scrutinize things to the point, that they lose their original meaning. Example of hyper-philosophy: "that depends on what the meaning of the word is, is".

When you use evolution or any other descript, as an all-encompassing word to describe a force that is responsible for all that exists, you are in essence saying that it began, continued and maintained all things, whether by it's own force or by placing this ability within all living cells. This would make evolution or other word/title to describe some "universal non-personal force", ONE SMART COOKIE!!