Part of the confusion with Darwinism is the design argument. People like Richard Dawkins are
obsessed with natural selection as the answer to the design argument in s proof of atheism.
It is the wrong approach. Who cares about the design argument? It proves nothing.
Nature is filled with design, and that doesn’t impinge on theism/atheism issues.
The term ‘intelligent’ design is more provocative, but again who cares. Nature
shows intelligent design but is not ‘intelligent’ in the sense of ordinary language
which implies a person. Set aside the term ‘intelligent’ or not it makes no difference.
Go to Google and type in biochemical machines and look at the incredible machines
arising in nature. https://images.app.goo.gl/qcxRccjBFrLoyoSf6
It has nothing to do with ‘god’. All it means is that current
technology is too primitive to imitate what nature can achieve.
Kant long ago warned of the fallacy of thinking ‘design’ could be
an argument for the existence of god. That is a blind alley.
Dawkins is a kind of hysteric on the subject, but it is pointless
and he has confused students of evolution badly.