... when it is of the "deus ex machina" kind - it's just poor storytelling
... but when slight, random currents driven by the energy from the sun can loop around on themselves, building into a global oceanic belt that takes command of the weather and continuously fends off all disintegrating forces, don't we see the faint beginnings of a teleology that emerges from within
Let me make a comment about the term teleonomy
That's pretty much the teleology without a deus ex machina.
We should be careful about these terms.
Asking why teleology has been banned from scientific discussions is a little bit like wondering what's wrong about solipsism.
Of course nobody will criticise you for being a solipsist. It's just that talking to a solipsist is completely obsolete and irrelevant, so nobody will do it.
So to explane the difference i see:
Teleology sees nature aiming towards a given goal. The result is seen as a purpose.
This concept clearly implies a will that stands behind nature as a creator, greetings from intelligent design.
Teleonomy as oppose to that also regards certain processes to be directed, however without any purpose.
Any increase of intelligence in the universe e.g. would be a collateral effect.
In many other philosophy forums (or discussions) you will have to deal with a kind of 'teleology inquisition'.
It's actually hard work to try and convience them that your point of view is not teleological but actually teleonomical.
Especially because hardly any teleology inquisitor is willing to even understand the concept of teleonomy.