A lot to unpack here, but I think your argument breaks down at Premise 1.

Premise 1 - You presume this to be true, but what do you mean by 'ordered'? What is your definition of 'order'? You list quite a few examples, and then assume that is self-evident.
I'd argue that many of these things are simply the conclusion of classical physics such as gravity and could be used to argue a world of disorder.

For example:
Complex biological systems - Is a single cell organism more or less 'ordered' than a multi-cell organism? When a reproducing cell has a mutation which causes the death of the cell, is that order or disorder? When a virus invades a cell to reproduce, is that order or disorder?
Stars - Is material collected together by gravity more 'ordered' than material that is spread out?
Planets - Same question above - material gathering around a gravity well. Is that more 'ordered' then a asteroid not caught in an orbit?
Water cycle - So, why does the fact that water goes through its phases imply order? On some planets, nitrogen goes through a cycle between liquid and gaseous due the pressure and temperature of that planet. It is an element following physical laws. Is that your definition of 'order'?
Planetary orbits - See above. If gravity exists, orbits will exist. This doesn't necessary make orbits 'orderly'. Is an elliptical orbit more 'orderly' than a circular one? Is a comet's orbit more 'orderly' than a planet's?

In your next paragraph, you imply that something is 'ordered' if it is 'useful'? What is useful? There are millions of rocks hurtling through the universe. Some of these could hit a planet at speeds to wipe out all life on that planet. Is that 'useful'? There are gamma rays hurtling through the universe that could kill any living cell in an instant. Is that 'useful' and 'ordered'?

For your final paragraph, you again assume that there is some quality called 'order' that could be applied to the universe. My argument is you are working backward. There is no inherent 'order' to the universe, but you are applying one. In the same way that there is no apparent 'meaning' in a sunset or a sunrise, and yet we has humans assign the quality of 'beauty' to the rotation of the earth and the decrease in photons.

It reminds me of a quote from Douglas Adams:

“This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.”

Anyway, some food for thought. Thanks for sharing. Have a great day.