Dinosaur tail found preserved in amber!

[Tonus]

I.D. doesn't stop anyone from researching or learning anything.   I don't see how your statement follows

That's because you misunderstood it. I'm pointing out that claims like "irreducible complexity" are attempts to stop research at a specific point. If something is irreducibly complex, then we've reached a start point and no further research into how it may have evolved is necessary. That isn't how science works.

I would disagree, if you are making an implication, that a cause must me confirmed, before you can make a scientific inference (or profile) of that cause.

You can make as many inferences and profiles as you wish. But until you actually find it, that's all they are. Like I said, you cannot claim that it exists if you cannot confirm its existence.

I would also be curious as to what definition you are using of confirmed.   It seems there are a number of claims of evolution, which would not meet your standards put forth here (modern synthesis and even common descent).

The standard dictionary definition. If there are claims of evolution that don't meet those standards, then they're not confirmed.

I would also ask you to look at who between us, is saying that we should not question or accept evidence, that may alter the theory's in this conversation?

I made no claims regarding the acceptance or denial of evidence. I pointed out how the scientific method works, and how the ID approach can run afoul of it. I also pointed out how one can apply the scientific method to ID in order to test its veracity. I don't know if you're not understanding me or reading something that you think is between the lines, but you don't seem to get the point I'm making.