Mental gymnastics of atheism

What's your criteria for acceptable evidence for God's existence? Irreducible complexity in animals? We have that (eg; the giraffe, cephalopods, bees...)

And no true Scotsman wears a kilt, lol

https://evolutionnews.org/2007/05/scientists_who_support_intelli/
https://www.discovery.org/v/scientists-speak-out-about-evidence-of-intelligent-design-in-nature/

If you're not sure what would be credible evidence, how can you be sure of your conclusions?

It's easy to achieve scientific consensus when you censor the ones who disagree.

Those links still prove there's scientists who support intelligent design, you're still committing the No True Scotsman Fallacy. I’ll do you a favour and cite another source that acknowledges there are scientists who support intelligent design.

https://www.aclu.org/documents/what-scientific-community-says-about-evolution-and-intelligent-design

Sounds like you've got some pre-prepared excuses for whenever proof of God appears. To borrow a quote; "You're not a skeptic, Fred. You're in denial."

You talk up evidence, but refuse to give a specific criterion for it. If you can't give a specific criterion for evidence, how can you judge the matter or reach a conclusion? Logically, you can't, which means you can't oppose or attack it either.