[frgoff]

Point 1. We don't know if we are alone.

Point 2. This is a conclusion based on point one. If point one is false, point two falls as an argument.

Point 2a: This is a post hoc fallacy. You are basically saying that because God has a plan for us, it must follow that he must clearly announce that plan to us. As a side note, perhaps he has announced it, and you just aren't listening.

Your point about Andromeda is conjecture posing as an inconsistency.

Point 3 suffers from the fallacy of subjectivism. You are presenting your opinion as fact. Let me give you an alternate perspective that will show we are superbly designed.

Mortal existence was designed as a learning experience, and therefore only needs to be temporary. Suffering is introduced so that joy may be comprehended. All of a sudden, the poor design doesn't look so poor, does it?

The goodness or badness of a design depends on the purpose of the designer. Without knowing that purpose, you can't make a judgement as to the merits of the design.

[boris]

"Point 1. We don't know if we are alone."

We almost certainly are. The Fermi Paradox. Read Rare Earth and get back to us. It's on Amazon.

--Boris

[boris]

"Mortal existence was designed as a learning experience, and therefore only needs to be temporary. Suffering is introduced so that joy may be comprehended. All of a sudden, the poor design doesn't look so poor, does it?"

Here you are presenting your opinion as a fact. Why, for example, did not an Eternal God design us for, say, a 1000-year lifetime? No skin off His nose...a thousand years or three-score plus ten--what's the difference?

--Boris