I’m a fan of P&T, but this is a strawman argument. While they did interview “legitimate” sources for the ID side, they were all young-earth creationists. Why? Because they are easy to refute.
I’m definately not sold on ID, but I would like the challenges they pose to the standard view of evolution to be addressed. Sure, some guy saying that the Grand Canyon was made in a handful of days is a crank. There are more researched and scientific challenges than these. I’m not sure if they are appropriate for High School Biology, but I have sought but not found a sufficient and researched answer to the challenge that evolution as currently presented is antientropic.
Granted, attacking young-earth creationism is like shooting fish in a barrel...but when almost half of Americans believe in it, those are fish that need to be shot.