This floating in front of my eyes, and I think it's an important point:
It reminds me of the Muslim's arguments for converting an atheist - pointing at things and saying, "You think that's just a coincidence! NO, IT WAS GOD!" They failed to even consider any simpler, non-hyper-magical explanation... nope, they leap towards the single most absurd explanation possible.
For the above image, these are cited as evidence that aliens have visited us, and gave us instruction.. among other things, because, clearly, there's no other way disparate humans might come to similar solutions for similar problems.
Humans suck at epistemology when it's supplanted by intuition. Science seeks to minimize these types of problems, foremost and simply, by at least requiring that claims are supported by positive evidence... not pointing at some probable coincidences and merely insisting they're not coincidences, as though one doesn't have to disprove the Null Hypothesis. That's an Argument from Ignorance.
This is the mistake I see evangelical/apologetic theists making constantly.