Watch in the Forest
The argument of design. Why it is called argument, but not a scientific proof? The method of science called "methodological naturalism" excludes from peer-review discussion (however, the arXiv includes the non-peer-review one) the theological face of reality. Thus, there can not be the "scientific" proof of God. And since the definition of Science is the "quest for Knowledge", the proof of God can not be named even a "proof". Thus, remains the word "argument". But latter is from the verb "to argue". Latter suggests, that the atheists are not crazy at all, but have valid (in the eyes of God) position in the known debates. Thus, the atheists will not be punished in hell.
Any change to that simple line of thought is not possible due to the satan's dictatorship over the Earth. What to do? Just forget about the imperfect notions and failing terms and read the following text with open mind of a truth-seeker.
The watch in the forest. Of course, because we are used to the thought, that any watch is made by watchmaker, not God, the found watch in the forest will not be associated with God, but with a human. But nevertheless, what the watch in the forest teaches us? It teaches us, that (as Newton ones demonstrated) nature is not a chaos. There is order in nature. And the transition between pre-historic chaos (latter includes absence of running time and space) into ordered life (with all its libraries, churches, institutes, galleries, love and dresses) needs either the God, or the wonder (wonder is defined as an exclusion from the every-day laws), and, thus, the Wonder-maker is needed.
The Dr. Stephen Hawking has understood it and tried to solved it in bestseller "Grand Design" by writing "because there is law like gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing."
What did the Stephen by that wording? He simply named the wonder of Big Bang as the law of nature. But there is logical conflict: a law holds at any time and in any place, but Big Bang would happened only once.