Yes you have, by default. As such your objections to ID are not scientific.
The starting axiom of science is that the fundamental properties of the universe do not change.
I reckon that shoots any notion of evolution square in the buns. Is this axiom subject to empirical proof? What makes it more scientific than the dearly beloved FSM?
Are you admitting that your claims are untestable?
No, I am not. I maintain that the presence of organized matter performing specific functions may reasonably be inferred as a product of intelligent design. My claims extend to organized matter, and to that extent they are testable. Further inferences and assumptions, like all inferences and assumptions, are not subject to empirical proof. That does not make them "unscientific."