Methinks thou doest presume too much.
Science is not afraid of ID or creationism. Scientists spend a great deal of time trying to eliminate extraneous effects from corrupting the outcomes of experiments. ID and creationism are simply some of those possible extraneous effects. Should they get special dispensation and be allowed to colour not only the results but the process of science?
Methinks not young buddy.
So who decides what is extraneous? The scientist is then setting up conditions on the experiment that HE thinks are necessary and that biases the experiment. His assumptions are his own and therefore subjective. There is no truly objective science that can be done. All the data is interpreted based on the particular scientists observations and presumptions. If he doesn't observe something properly or misinterprets it, then the experiment is usless.
Your statement that ID and creationism are extraneous are your opinion only. There is no objective standard to which you can appeal to support your statement. You're presuming that the naturalistic approach to science is neutral and unbiased, but it's not because you are starting with an assumption reflecting your world view.