The more substantial point is this. Simply claiming that a Creator/Designer is the “best explanation” hardly amounts to showing
that a Creator/Designer really is the “best explanation.” In my
experience, many (but not all) people who invoke a Creator or Designer
as the “best explanation” fail to show that it is the best explanation.
Indeed, some (and this includes WK, at least in the linked post) don’t
even try! Instead, they just assume that a Creator or Designer is an explanation. If, however, the design hypothesis isn’t an explanation at all, then it cannot be the best explanation.
This is always an interesting issue. But does it really make sense to
ask of an omnipotent being how they did something. For example, I once
beat a Grandmaster in a chess tournament. Now, you might ask how I did
that, since as someone whose rating has never gone above expert, you
might wonder how I did that. (And the answer isn't all the flattering,
was able to win because my opponent had had entirely too much to drink.)
But if I have all power, then the simple answer is that I used the
power of omnipotence to get it done.