Bwahahahahahahah! See below:
I've already told you science is not only about "objective proofs." It functions primarily on reason and reasonable evidence. Take any physical object and observe it for a period of time. Does it behave predictably? If so, that is one piece of evidence for intelligent design. Are you able to observe it in the first place? That, too, is a piece of evidence for intelligent design. Does this objectively prove intelligent design? No, and it doesn't have to in order to be scientific.
Bwahahahahahahahaha!! My bird behaves in an unpredictable manner.
As you say, evidence does not have to be scientific or objective to be considered valid. By your standard, my bird's unpredictable behavior is one piece of evidence that that ID (creationism) is an invalid theory.
There you again on the "objectively proven" binge. The most convincing argument against intelligent design would be for particle matter to behave erractically or disintegrate altogether. This tends to happen very rarely, so the evidence against intelligent design seems nearly non-existent in that regard.
Bwahahahahahahahaha!!
ID (creationism) is to science what the whole-word method of teaching was to english and spelling. Creationists don't need to prove anything using objective evidence. Simply believing is good enough. LOL!
My bird says your theory is full of beans.
Has your bird been subject to scientific study with regard to it's behavior? I would posit that it behaves in a manner generally in accord with its species.
Simply believing is good enough.
Yes indeed. When it comes right down to it, that is largely what science is all about.