Well, it does matter.
The EF’s logic takes these questions in order.
- Is it known natural processes alone? If yes, then conclude not designed.
- Is it chance alone? If yes, then conclude non designed.
- Conclude design.
Here is one major error though. Design, known natural process, chance are not exhaustive. Here are a few other examples of explanations that are not considered:
- Natural processes (known and unknown)
- Natural processes (known and unknown) + Chance
- Known natural processes + Chance
Of course, if we are talking about God’s design, natural processes alone can also be design any way! So even finding it is natural processes alone should not cause to conclude not designed. Mount Everest, after all, is also designed by God.
So, for all these reasons and more, EF is a totally invalid inference. So the EF formulated version of FTA is not valid. That matters.