"EVALUATE THE CLAIM THAT THE UNIVERSE HAS TOO MANY FLAWS IN IT FOR IT TO BE DESIGNED."
The teleological arguments put forth by philosophers such as Paley and Aquinas make the assumption that the appearance of design implies there is a designer. However, there is much evidence within our world of imperfection, which ultimately undermines this view point; it does, however, give way to the possibility of a designer that does not fit the traditional characteristics we assert to him; if God has a limit to its power but can still design, then flaws do not diminish the idea of a designer God existing.
The traditional assumption that we make when we infer design in the universe is that the designer is good, or moral. With natural disasters which kill multiple people on a yearly basis, this argument holds little weight to it. Therefore if we argue that an omnipotent God designed our world, we'd have to logically also infer that this God designed it in such a way that it would occasionally show its imperfection in deadly ways, by making way for destructive volcanoes, eathquakes and tsunamis. Such imperfection contradicts the ideas of philosophers such as Paley, who argue that the world looks designed in order to fulfil particular functions - arguably to habitate humans. However when it turns against us, this idea loses its strength. We are left to conclude that such flaws just support the view that there has been no design, and that there is therefore no designer to account for this.