It sounded like you were saying certain things (like intelligent life) aren't possible without an intelligent designer. Yet your so called "original" intelligence had no designer of his own. He/she is just there.
Sounds like a contradiction.
Vague much? You're coming across as dishonest now.
I think now is the time to admit you're wrong. You know it. I know it. Don't hide it (clearly you're bad at it).
Now you're just playing with words. An intelligence that's more capable is a more intelligent entity. So you're saying we arose from something less intelligent. Saying it's the same intelligence, but less capable is just twisting words.
If you want to call basic organic chemistry simple...
So we're more intelligent than our creator? And that creator is more intelligent than its creator? And so on and so forth? Either way, it means intelligence arose from non-intelligence.
It's a self-defeating notion regardless. Arguing that complex life requires a creator, begs the question of whether the creator is more complex than the created. If yes, then this creator himself requires an even more complex creator, in which case you run into an infinite regression problem. If...
How do you know it's not important to you if you're ignorant of the subject?
People living during the back plague didn't know the importance of not having open wounds. Instead, a lot of them voluntarily got whipped because they thought they had to repent.
Why bother making a bagillion other planets then? This Earth and this Sun is just for us, and there's no aliens around on other planets? Are the 100 octillion stars out there made especially for us too? Even the ones that blow up before we ever even get a chance to visit them?
Or maybe it's... what's the phrase? Turtles all the way down? As in, the designer was designed by a designer, who was designed by a designer, who was designed by a designer, who was... well you get the idea. lol
Actually do that. Don't just say you will and then continue to fearmonger GMOs later on without understanding it.
Often with no evidences to support their claim.
Bone does not form before flesh in embryology. We're still not mud nor are we made from it. Just because we share some of the same elements does not make us the same.
Water and hydrogen peroxide have the same elements, but they are still drastically different substances.
The Quran says something about humans being made from clay. It also says that the bones are wrapped around with flesh as an embryo forms. Those are scientific errors.
How is it not confirmation bias? The Quran says some random thing about flowers in the sky, and you look for something in real life that can vaguely match the description. That's the very definition of confirmation bias. Why doesn't the Quran just straight up say it's a nebula?