William Paley was a British theologian during the 18th century. He presented the watchmaker argument as proof of the existence of god in 1802.
The opening passage begins like this: "In crossing a heath, suppose I pitched my foot against a stone, and were asked how the stone came to be there; I might possibly answer, that, for anything I knew to the contrary, it had lain there forever: nor would it perhaps be very easy to show the absurdity of this answer. But suppose I had found a watch upon the ground, and it should be inquired how the watch happened to be in that place; I should hardly think of the answer I had before given, that for anything I knew, the watch might have always been there."
I am sure you could find the entire argument if you want to read the entire argument. But, believe it or not, I have read articles written by creationists advocating using Paley's argument in science classes.
Paley didn't know the difference in a watch and a stone, or human artifacts from works of nature. It also appears that some of the creationists don't know the difference either.