Why Current Science (Including the Big Bang) Points Directly Towards Intelligent Design of the Universe
A. The first law of Thermodynamics states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed
B. The second law of Thermodynamics states that energy always flows in the direction of increased entropy. 
C. Therefore, our universe had a beginning. 
Argument 2: (From Aristotle)
A. Things either come into being or they are eternal
B. All things which have come into being were caused to come into being by a cause 
C. Therefore, our universe was caused to come into being by a cause
Argument 3: (From Aquinas)
A. As we have previously said, there are only eternal or caused things
B. The cause of the universe could not have been non-eternal, because then it would have needed to be created by something else
C. Therefore, the cause of the universe must have been an eternal cause, or (as in Aristotle) an « unmoved mover »
Argument 4a: (From William Lane Craig)
A. According to Big Bang Theory, not only matter & energy, but both space and time were created at the beginning of the universe
B. Therefore, the cause of the universe must be something beyond matter, energy, space, and time
C. William Lane Craig would also argue at length that current attempts to scientifically disparage Big Bang cosmology over the past half-century have all continually failed.
Argument 4b: (Also from William Lane Craig)
A. The only things we know of that are beyond matter/space/time are: 1) ideas, laws & concepts, 2) personal minds
B. The cause of the universe could not have been an idea, law or universe because these entities are static and do not move. Therefore they cannot cause anything to come to pass. 
C. A personal mind would be capable of making a decision such as to cause the universe to come into being 
D. Therefore, we conclude that the original cause of the universe was:
1) (Obviously) powerful enough to cause the universe to exist
2) Able to exist beyond space/time/matter, while still able to interact with it
3) A personal mind, capable of willing for the universe to exist
Thus I conclude that current scientific theories – including the Big Bang – provide compelling evidence that there is indeed a personal, all-powerful being behind the origins of the universe.
A. There are three basic options for such a being: 1) a God of some sort, 2) an alien, 3) some unknown being
B. If an alien or unknown being had powers and characteristics such as we have been describing, he/she/it would be identical to what we normally mean when we speak of deity. 
C. Therefore, it seems almost inescapable that the evidence all points towards some sort of a God behind the creation of the universe.
 Entropy is a measurement of waste energy – usually heat. What this law says, basically, is that the universe is burning itself out of useable energy. For example, you could hold a litre of gasoline in your hands. Now there is some real good potential energy! But what happens when you burn it? Now you just have heat. That heat is still a form of energy, but it is less useable. And if you don’t use it right now (for example to boil water or run a car) the heat will leak out into the environment and be gone. In a similar way, but on a grand scale, scientists say that the universe is burning up its useable energy. Stars are continually « burning » (actually a nuclear reaction) and are sending heat and radiation off into space, never to be retrieved again. Also, the planets and galaxies are swirling further apart from each other, and the planets themselves are slowing and cooling. For these reasons, it is the general consensus of scientists today that our universe had a beginning.
 This conclusion may not seem obvious if you do not know these two laws well. Read over what I wrote in the first footnote, and please send me a comment if you think I am not being clear enough.
 This law is made more obvious by thinking what would happen if it were not true. Do things just pop into existence out of nowhere? They most certainly do not! And all science would shatter if they did! As Shakespeare has said, « Nothing will come of nothing. » Things are either eternal, or they have come into being. True enough, there are some micro-physicists who say that in a certain type of experiment, particles « appear » out of nothingness – or a vacuum – and then disappear again. This experiment is usually used by atheists to discredit this point. However, when William Lane Craig asks them if there is really nothing in the vaccuum they fall silent. According to Einstien, matter can be converted to energy, and vice versa. In reality, these particles are not just appearing from « nowhere, » but are converting from energy to matter, then back again. But both energy and matter would have been created at the beginning of the universe. If matter/energy/time/space sprang out of nothing, it would be a quite different thing than what is observed in these experiments.
 If they were to cause something to come to pass, they would do so necessarily, and they would have done so by now, so that the universe would have been burned out infinitely long ago already. But this is already fraying the edges of our comprehension of what a « timeless » eternity may be like!
 William Lane Craig gives this example: « Say an eternal, conscious being was sitting on a chair for all eternity. He could one day decide to stand up. But the number five could never decide to become four and a half. » The one is able to affect reality in arbitrary and surprising ways: the other can only influence reality in ways which are essential to it’s nature.
 Think about it! If an alien had a personal mind, existed outside of space/time/matter/energy and had the power to create the universe, wouldn’t you be correct to call him/her/it a god? Perhaps we would not love this god like many love Jesus – but we would at least have to fear him like they used to fear Zeus! How could such an alien – so far removed from us, so different, so powerful, and yet so intimately involved in all our affairs – keep from evoking feelings of religious awe, reverence and fear from us, if not more?