Why Intelligent Design is Unclear

The question of the existence of God has been debated throughout the ages. Today, there is a movement to teach "Intelligent Design" in the classroom alongside the "Theory of Evolution." Personally, I'm not against the teaching of Intelligent Design, but neither do I have an overriding compulsion to see it taught. I'd much rather see classes on epistemology (How do you know that you know?) taught in high school. That could be an eye-opening experience for many people.

In any event, I've seen a number of arguments against Intelligent Design and would like to examine one in particular here. This is essentially the argument that if there is an Intelligent Design to the universe, why isn't it more obvious? That is, why doesn't the conclusion that there is a designer simply leap out from the evidence? If one finds a watch on a beach, and one picks it up to examine it, it seems to clearly indicate a designer of some sort. There is an obvious problem with this argument: namely, the watch is part of the universe. We can't get outside the universe and look at it. And, as far as we are concerned, the only examples of non-design come from within the universe. But if intelligent design is correct, then these examples of non-design may actually be examples of a more subtle design. Regardless, if we understand making the intuitive leap regarding a designer for the watch, what is the problem with making an intuitive leap regarding a designer for something like, say, the ecosystem of planet earth? And from there, the universe itself?