Fyron: I think some of the miscommunication comes from what I read of Hume's arguments. Of course, I just picked the first link I found.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree here. I accept that any analogy is an imperfect representation; but since there is no perfect analogy, we have to use what there is. Otherwise, we have to throw out any philosophy built on analogy. I also agree that the design argument doesn't prove the identity, number, or purpose of the designer.
Hume's argument that nature naturally produces order supports both sides. If you already believe in a designer, then design happening in nature is further proof of that design. If you don't believe in one, it's further proof that one is not needed.
Further arguments about evil in the world do not contradict the design argument. They fit into the "Since there's design, who designed it?" debates.
I'm sure I had more to say, but I can't remember without checking the thread again.