[Dimensio]

No amount of evidence is enough to convince someone determined NOT to believe in something that that thing exists.

But in the case of ID, no evidence is presented. All that we have is conjecture in the form of "I can't imagine this coming about without a designer, so a designer did it". No explanation of the nature of the designer, nor any explanation of the methods by which the designer designed things. With a scratched tablet we know that humans exist and we know how humans can put scratches in a tablet. No such analog exists for ID.

[Buggman]

It would be easier by several millions of orders of magnitude for wind to naturally carve out a clay slab to appear to be pre-cuniform writing than for abiogenesis to occur by accident. We're only just beginning to understand and replicate the kind of molecular machinery that are vital for the function of the simplest cell, this after thousands of years of technological progress.

And yet you want the 99% of the world who do believe in a Creator God to buy your peculiar mythology that the cell happened by accident, while the clay tablets we pull from the desert and study are considered to be artifacts of intellegent design.

Yeah, that's logical and scientific.