As David has pointed out many times, either everything was created, or it wasn't. It is a pretty short list of options. That means that there either is a God(s), or there isn't. There really is no middle ground. Finding the least absurd answer then mean's that it is most likely the correct on. -In order to recognize design, there are some thing that we can typically look for:-

• Specified complexity - that is, that the chance of something reach a given level of complexity is impossible by random chance.
• Purpose - There is a clear purpose to the item in question.
• Need - In many cases, a design fills a specific need.
• Efficiency - This is one of those weird ones, the best example I can think of right off the top of my head is, if you toss a box of chips(fries) into the air, random chance will not pack them neatly and efficiently into the most ideal configuration.
• Redundancy - Randomness does not produce effective redundancy
• Error Correct - Randomness does not produce error correction
• Stability - Randomness can produce stability, so stability has to be taken in conjunction with, and in the context of, other elements on the list.
• Simplicity - This may seem at odds with complexity, but it is not. Randomly generated events are typically needlessly complex. In this case, simplicity is the combination of Specified Complexity coupled with Efficiency in order to fill a purpose or need.
• Aesthetics - Randomness is typically not aesthetically pleasing to the senses.
• Balance - Randomness does not typically produce a balanced system, it may produce a seemingly balanced distribution(like the probability of a dice roll), but that is not really the same thing.

-These are just a few things. Yet, they are all things that we see in nature. If randomness can not create these attributes repeatably, then how do we explain that they all repeatedly exist? If it is not random, the ONLY other possibility is design.