I want to clarify the idea here. 1) We don't know how life originated on Earth. 2) We don't have a full idea of what happened during the Cambrian explosion.

I want to clarify the idea here. 1) We don't know how life originated on Earth. 2) We don't have a full idea of what happened during the Cambrian explosion. 3) We don't know how human consciousness manifests itself in the brain. 4) Evolution by random natural processes is not possible without deliberate nudges. Is the claim here that 1-3 is simply not possible without an intelligent entity intervening in the natural laws? If so, I'm personally fine with it. God (who is the most popular potential Intelligent Designer) has always been a God of the Gaps. In the future, I am pretty confident we'll figure out the explanations using just the physical laws of the universe. But if the claim also includes 4, then I think it can be discarded with a high confidence. We can already observe how evolution works at the virus and bacteria level. We have found the transitional fossils [0]. The science of evolutionary development biology [1] is already giving us great insights into how organisms translate the genetic code to build our complex bodies. It also shows how the same genes have been reused across species (e.g., the genes for eyes in the house fly and humans are the same). We don't need the Intelligent Design hypothesis to explain evolution. (EDIT: I see from another comment that you already agree to the above point.) The claim Intelligent Design supporters can make at best is that God created the first cells, perhaps nudged them a little during the Cambrian explosion, and perhaps again intervened before the evolution of Homo Sapiens. But all the rest happened the boring way, following the natural laws. > we have never seen life come from non life. Does not imply we never will. Given the countless other times this argument has been used to justify an Intelligent Creator when we didn't know something, I give very low credence to the idea that /this/ time is truly it. Unless someone can show mathematically why life cannot possibly emerge from the natural laws, naturalism remains the best hypothesis. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_developmental_biology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_developmental_bio...