Intelligent design?

If the universe is intelligently designed, then why does it appear to be unintelligently designed in structure, simply being a matter of emergence, bottoms up structure rather than from the top down? Everything we see in the universe is explainable by natural phenomena, the laws of physics are sufficient to explain what we see in our own universe rather than invoking some magic entity to attempt to explain it all.

Some might point out the wonders of life as “proof” of intelligent design. A good question to ask them is, if life is intelligently designed, then why do whales have lungs? An intelligent designer wouldn’t give whales lungs, he’d give them gills, and yet whales still have lungs like every other mammal out there. That is a stupid design, and you expect me to believe some omniscient, omnipotent deity created whales from scratch, complete with flaws? If that is really the case, then your god is a stupid one indeed.

Oddities like the presence of lungs in whales or vestigial tailbones in modern humans indicates that we had ancestors that possessed lungs and tails, which also implies that we have changed over time to lose our tails. If that’s not evidence of evolution, then what is it?

This doesn’t apply to just life either, even the structure of the universe itself is explainable by natural laws and the concept of emergence. Grand as galaxies may be, they are not intelligent constructs, but merely swirling bunches of stars, gas, and rock gravitationally bound to a supermassive black hole in the centers of all galaxies, solar systems may appear to be expert pieces of clockwork, but all we see suggests that the order we see in our solar system alone is merely the work of natural laws like gravity and emergence, we don’t have too many asteroids in our orbit because Earth cleared them all out, all of the ice giants are located in the outer solar system because that’s where conditions are cool enough for “ices” like ammonia to coalesce around rocky, metallic cores, the reasons rings of minor planetary bodies like the Asteroid or Kuiper Belt is because those are the regions of the Solar System where no large planets have formed that are big enough to clear their orbits of debris, essentially being the leftover remnants of when our solar system first formed, over five billion years ago.

Since all we see in nature is easily explainable by natural phenomena and emergence, why do we feel the need to deny reality and invoke nonexistent deities and magic instead to explain them?

The Principle of Sufficient Reason

Leibniz famously stated that everything must have a reason and a cause, and that, metaphysically speaking, it would be impossible for there to such a thing that doesn’t have a reason or a cause. That reason and/or cause doesn’t necessarily have to be of conscious origin, the reason/cause that solar systems form is because of the interplay between the solar nebular and the developing stars within, with most of the dust and gas going to form the star and the rest being essentially leftovers relegated to form the various planetary bodies of the solar system that is being formed from the remnants of the solar nebula.

Nothing of the creation of solar systems can be shown to have had any discernible conscious intervention in the creation of said solar system, and yet we still know the reason solar systems form. Could something of the same be said for the universe, that even though Leibniz’s principle of sufficient reason mandates that everything has a reason and a cause, that said reason and cause don’t have to be of conscious, divine origin?

I would be interested to hear the apologist’s attempted rebuttal of this notion, for Occam’s Razor dictates that those explanations that are less parsimonious be discarded in favor of those explanations that are more parsimonious, or require less assumptions, so by using Occam’s Razor, would it be acceptable to state that, per Leibniz’s principle of sufficient reason, that said reason the universe exists is less likely to have been of supernatural rather than natural causation?