DAVID: Let's look at a philosophic view just published about our improbability:
https://nautil.us/issue/95/escape/is-life-special-just-because-its-rare-rp?mc_cid=d526f...

dhw: I thought all our discussions revolved round the existence and purposefulness of your God. Our philosopher deliberately brushes that aside and focuses on ETs in his grand conclusion. I was merely expressing surprise that you accepted this point of focus as the grand climax.

DAVID: God is purposeful, and the author didn't completely deny Him.

This is a non-discussion. I was surprised that you had not commented on his woolly conclusion. Now you have commented.

DAVID: How do you explain our existence? My answer is not by chance!

dhw: That is not an explanation. That is the dismissal of an explanation. Just as others would “explain” existence as being “not by an unknown, unknowable, eternally conscious, immaterial mind without a source but with infinite powers of psychokinesis.”

DAVID: The evidence of complex designs requires a designing mind. A tornado in a junk yard never makes a 747. For me appealing to chance is totally illogical.

dhw: I am happy to agree with you and Hoyle that chance is illogical. Now look at your explanation: bbbonly a living, conscious mind can design life and consciousness, and therefore our life and consciousness were designed by a living, conscious mind which was not designed by anything at all. Logical?

DAVID: You deny a first cause, which is not logical.

I have never denied a first cause! I have listed three possible first causes (your God, chance, and some form of panpsychism) but find none of them convincing enough to take a leap of faith. Now please explain the logic of your bolded theory above.