The purpose here is to come up with the most absurdist proof of the existence of an Intelligent Designer/Deity. The best entry will win the Kirk Cameron Award for ID Studies (in honour of his famous banana video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z-OLG0KyR4 ).
So here goes with the first proof:
God made the continents in pleasing shapes for us to enjoy. See, for example, how South America neatly fits into Africa. Atheists will no doubt try to tell you it’s just a coincidence…
“ID is true because it’s obviously true. Just look at the world. How else can you explain it? And because 1+1 = 2 (T&Cs apply). If that’s still not enough, I can show you an old book. QED.”
'Luthon64
My proof of ID is that humans were given dominion over nature and were just “coincidentally” able to develop all the necessary tools to be able to subjugate all of nature. That cannot be an accident.
Yup. If cows were not meant to feed us, then how come they give far more milk than their calves need?
I have a problem with this brian, much like the highly trafficked “psychic” thread you may get people wandering in here only to find all the evidence they need to not believe skeptics. A true Poe.
I’d find it very funny indeed if I ever run into a creationist using an argument he got here. You have now given me reason to redouble my efforts. 
The Colonel’s Botanico-commercial Argument for Intelligent Design
Premises:
Bland, home boiled chicken is sufficiently nutritious to sustain humans.
Flavoured, pressure fried, crispy chicken demonstrably sells better.
Oil, flour and spices are derived from plants.
The production of pungent flavours, husks bulging with starch, and seeds containing copious amounts of lipid offers no advantage to the plant itself.
Commercial systems are intelligently designed.
All living things are related through common ancestry.
Therefore, by 1,2 and 3:
By 7, 4 and 5:
By 8 and 6:
It’s also noteworthy that a chicken is just the exact right size to feed a family. Not too small, not too large. It suggests intelligent design. Also, it suggests that the classical respectable family of two parents and two kids, or perhaps three, if the third one is not a big eater, is just exactly right.
“Mens moet drie kinders hê,” seg 'n waardige omie my eendag. “Twee om jou en jou vrou te vervang, en een om die volk te bou.”
I grew up with:
Een vir God, een vir volk en een vir die oudag… translated as eldest should be a dominee, middle child a doctor or lawyer, and youngest to literally care for you, that one (or the girl in the family) wasnt worthy of tertiary education. Makes absolute sense.
Nowadays, if you don’t have a tertiary education, you can hardly look after yourself, let alone care for an elderly parent. 
Nowadays, it depends entirely on which field of tertiary education will allow you to eat.
True, those degrees in political science and biblical studies that are so popular among some demographies have their limits. Though apparently any degree at all actually greatly increases your chance of finding employment. But I guess there are lots of graduate cashiers out there.