I was just thinking about the arguments atheists often use while getting ready for work. When you point out how the idea that everything just created itself on its own is impossible, they will eventually rely on the "wheres your proof of God? You cant prove He exists!". I was thinking about how the word "proof" can change at any point for the sake of an argument.
Point out how the idea that life exists on a balance on earth that somehow both came into being and continues to sustain itself keeping life possible for so long being evidence that some kind of thought process must have been involved in the origins of our existence? Ridiculous, you need real proof for that argument. Clearly all of this came about due to a few molecules exploding somehow throwing everything we know into balance.
(If youre wondering about how those molecules got there, stop it. They clearly always existed, as matter apparently does sometimes)
Claiming that life came about on its own and built upon itself into more complicated, complex beings despite not even needing to in order to continue existing? Absolutely, cant you see how some animals share similar traits with others, and that some life forms adapt to their environment? Viruses change when the body forms an immunity against them, and my eye expands and shrinks depending on how much light is around me. That is completely undeniable, inarguable evidence that only a fool would refuse to see. It doesnt need to be seen or reproduced, we have all the proof we need.
Observation can clearly be evidence for one group, and clearly be laughed at when used by another : p
(I could have worded that better but Im in a rush to get ready for work : p)