rationalskepticism.org

xionior wrote:The argument "we are so complex we must be specifically designed" points exactly to the opposite conclusion.
In a general design sense, more is bad, you want the simplest possible solution because it has less potential problems. And this design principle shows itself in humans too - if you think about it, our genetic code is very badly designed. We suffer from tens of thousands of different health problems. We take it as normal because we haven't seen anything better, but this is not a sign of an intelligent design.
There are also thousands of different species which seem to have solved a lot of our problems, but we don't have these parts of their genetic code. This excludes the possibility that the "designer" didn't know how to solve these problems. If the system was designed, we would have the best possible code,

but instead it looks like each different "branch" of the biosphere has focused on different things and "improved" their genetic code independently from the others, exactly as the Evolution model suggests.