What can we tell about the designer from the design? While there is much that is marvelous in nature, there is also much that is flawed, sloppy and downright bizarre...In mammals, for instance, the recurrent laryngeal nerve does not go directly from the cranium to the larynx, the way any competent engineer would have arranged it. Instead, it extends down the neck to the chest, loops around a lung ligament and then runs back up the neck to the larynx. In a giraffe, that means a 20-foot length of nerve where 1 foot would have done. If this is evidence of design, it would seem to be of the unintelligent variety.
It's easy to "discover" imperfections when YOU set the standard for the definition of terms, as Holt has done.
There are many things designed into space projects (I worked on several) that lay people would find difficult to understand. The project engineers would have no such problems. Holt defining for God what is and is not intelligent is like a project manager asking the janitor to set mission priorities.
Finite creatures critiquing the infinite remind me of an old saying, "It's one thing to have people suspect you are a fool, it's quite another to open your mouth and remove all doubt" ... as Holt has done.