[Dimensio]

Such is your hope and faith.

It is not "hope and faith". Natural selection has been observed. That you deny it does not change reality.

So what? Science is not confined to absolute proofs. It consists chiefly of reasonable conjecture. ID is certainly reasonable.

Why is it reasonable? What reason is there to assume that "organized matter performing specific functions" can only be a result of intelligent design?

As a theory it also fits more observable data than natural selection.

What "observable data"? Note that "organized matter performing specific functions" is not itself "observable data" until you can demonstrate a link between such matter and intelligent design. Thus far I have observed that you do not attempt to establish such a link. You merely assert that the existence of such matter is evidence of ID, but you never actually explain why.

[Fester Chugabrew]

Note that "organized matter performing specific functions" is not itself "observable data" until you can demonstrate a link between such matter and intelligent design.

BS. Organized matter performing specific functions is indeed observable data which may be reasonably interpreted as a product of intelligent design. I no more have to demonstrate a physical, intellectual, personal link in this case than a physicist has to place a Higgins particle under your nose in order to reasonably infer they exist, posit them as explanatory, and still be scientific.