A disclaimer before I present my evidence for Creation
I have found that Atheists are very selective about what they consider to be evidence that would support any other worldview then the ones they presuppose. Evidence does not speak for itself, we all have bias and we all interpret evidence through the filters of our assumptions. So that what is "Reasonable" to one individual, may be unreasonable to another.
I have many presuppositional approaches that I can demonstrate showing the rationality of an intelligence behind creation. I can also demonstrate how any worldview outside of a special creation point of view is not consistent with Science or Ethics. But I will make this post very simple and stay as close as I can to Empirical evidence as requested.
EVIDENCE for INTELLIGENCE/CREATION:
1- Information begets Information: In order for us to make use of Science as a tool, we must assume that nature can be predictable. The examined world around us works in a generally mechanical, intelligent and predictable way. This is what scientists ASSUME when they approach the scientific modem of observation and tests. In fact, this assumption of general predictability of nature is EXACTLY what you would expect in a creation model. Why? Because if we observe intelligence in nature, we can assume an intelligent designer. [Information begetting information] At the very least, this assumption is consistent with observable evidence.
Science cannot assume arbitrary starting points for nature [non-intelligence] since this would automatically assume that nothing in nature can truly be predicted, since there would be ultimately no objective laws to govern nature.
What we CAN know is that there is absolutely no existing scientific model that will demonstrate that we can get INFORMATION from NON-INFORMAITON. If we did, Atheists would be holding this up as the holy grail of its dogma. But there isn't. The only model science can use [ironically enough] is a model that assumes intelligence and universal laws.
When DNA is examined, this can be examined in terms of intelligence, since information is passed from one generation to another. Predictable models of information are taken away from the DNA to generate characteristics from one generation to another. Dog breeders do this all the time.
DNA is a code of information passed down from parent to child. Its predictable and generally stable. This is exactly what we would expect to observe if we assume INTELLIGENCE behind creation. Again, the evidence of nature always shows us that Information begets information, consistent with the assumptions of creationism.
This means the burden of proof/evidence falls on the one who claims there is no intelligence behind creation. Show me a model that shows this is true?