The "basis for ID" is the "god of the gaps" argument which has failed innumerable times in the past. I doubt it will be any more successful this time in the long run.
Intelligent Design is about explaining the complexity of life's information and structures
Again, the "design hypothesis" actually "explains" nothing. It just passes the buck without making any specific explanations.
that Darwinian evolution has not and cannot scientifically prove.
Again, this wording makes no sense.
The scientific assumptions logically line up with ID not TOE.
You're quite mistaken, but feel free to try to list them for us.
Read up on supervolcanoes to discover how TOE fails in relation to our reality.
Okay, I'll bite -- what in the *heck* do supervolanoes have to do with biological evolution in any way, and how are they a "problem' for evolution?
Try wiping a majority of the "advances" in complexity clean every 50,000 years. Quite a hurdle to leap when a theory relies so heavily on the element of time. Then throw in the passing life ending magnitude comet like Shumaker Levy, which we saw during our lifetimes hit a planet in our solar system.
It is not looking good when we stretch this thing out to the time for your fledgling deaf, dumb and blind theory to do it's work. Pinball wizard indeed; bouncing life out of existence conservatively every couple 100,000 years (don't give me the, "all comets hit Jupiter" line, either).
Do not despair. The creationists we're left with in these threads are the most irrational and dishonest of the bunch. Their movement has truly reached its nadir. As I review their posts, I find great cause for optimism. Only the genuine dregs remain to defend their peculiar form of lunacy. Evolution is not only triumphant in the world of science, but even here, where anyone can post anything, creationism is obviously crushed. With defenders such as these, can a climax like Jonestown be very distant in creationism's future?