Nitpicking. The two are synonymous fapp and certainly as assumed this thread. Are you being serious? Unless one believes in an eternal universe, self-creation is the only other option compatible with atheism. That is just basic logic. Or going the argument from authority route: https://www.icr.org/article/hawking-says-universe-created-itself Here, a reminder of how it is in the real world: https://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums/debate-room/science-inherently-atheistic You and the rest of the majority atheist gang here hammer the point that ID (that obviously includes and default presupposes an intelligent God) is 'unscientific'. Yes but only by way of how modern science is narrowly defined. See above. In practice it positively excludes any notion of the supernatural. Widely known it's career suicide to ever posit God or anything supernatural as a possible cause or influence. For sensible folk, any truly hitting that wall then becomes strong indirect evidence for a God. What third option is there? Ha ha. Elevating yourself above the unseemly fray? Nah, just being provocative. You already know my stated position: http://www.sciforums.com/posts/3657825/ And that was not the first time I declared it thus here at SF.