[P5fRxh5kUvp2th]

how so?

A simple explanation would be that the aliens are much simpler than we are in makeup because it happened purely by evolution, and that part of our complexity came through planning.

There's just too many possibilities to so confidently claim it's kicking the can down the road.

[knome]

Simplicity would be more likely to imply creation than complexity.

Simplicity implies understanding and intent.

No one would design the absolute spaghetti code mess that underlies our existence.

Look at the computers we build. Neat little rows and friendly little abstractions.

Life isn't. It's billions of years of good enough hacks layered one atop the other, and sometimes transitioned sideways from other forks of the code base.

Near half our DNA is just viral cruft that got mixed up and passed along for untold generations.

>Eight percent of our DNA consists of remnants of ancient viruses, and another 40 percent is made up of repetitive strings of genetic letters that is also thought to have a viral origin

https://www.cshl.edu/the-non-human-living-inside-of-you/

[P5fRxh5kUvp2th]

none of that obviates that there could have been a design at some point.

It's just fun to think about.

[dsego]

Suppose living matter came to earth on an asteroid. That still doesn't explain how living things emerge from non-living matter.

> the aliens are much simpler than we are in makeup because it happened purely by evolution, and that part of our complexity came through planning.

That looks like argument from complexity. And it seems that complexity through planning would require an even more complex creator, not a simpler one.

> There's just too many possibilities

I don't think it makes a difference either way. If we can figure out one way of making life from non-living matter, we've cracked the code, we don't need to know how exactly it happened.

[P5fRxh5kUvp2th]

I think you need to read back over what I said and consider that you've _completely_ misunderstood it.