I myself have used "space aliens" as an example of possible "intelligent creators", because ID isn't directly linked to Scripture for all of us.
I remember a FReeper South-something coming at the "junk DNA" argument using the logic of computer programming a couple of years ago.
Where is the body of ID theory that can be tested and used to make successful predictions?
If I was working in science, I'd probably be trying to find an explanation for "instinctual" behaviors. I'm talking nature versus nurture. Some behaviors can best be explained by a complex "code". The more complex the instinctual behavior, the more complex the "coding" for it would need to be.
Beyond instinct, the simplest autonomic functions are complex activities. Current thinking is good at explaining what, but why remains a huge mystery. Yes, I know that matter has no intent & it just responds to the laws of nature. We're left to describing motion, not how that motion began. That which is in motion tends to remain in motion, etc...
Given the need to adhere to scripture above all, there is no such body of theory as is required to be a part of science.
Your statement is premised on the belief that all who read & believe in Scripture follow a single train of thought about what it says & means. By stating that, you make a mistake.
I'll accept that ID is a science when it operates using the scientific method.
But to date, the single largest and most active proponent of ID, the Discovery Institute, is clearly pushing religion thinly disguised as science.
Significant portions of their funding for these efforts are from religious sources, and are undertaken by people with clearly religious goals. The methods used are those of propaganda and PR, rather than science. They employ lawyers and PR flacks, rather than research scientists.
And here is the Wedge Strategy which exposes their true goals. These are their Governing Goals:
Not exactly science, eh?