The IDists like to think this. There is no indication that this new approach has yielded anything yet. No new insights, no new theories, no explanations, no new evidence. So, instead of tweaking their approach to make it work, they blame an imaginary monopoly that scientists hold over scientific inquiry (as if!). And they try to destroy the current system by destroying science education and by inundating the public with volumes of demogoguery.
And so they should quit thinking?
The only thing "new" about their approach is that it is asking questions based on observations that may bring to light that indeed, God does exist. I'd like to know what questions they're asking and see what evidence they would propose. Some folks (whom I am more inclined to equate with torch and pitchfork types) wish to deny them a hearing altogether.
Science is looking for intelligent life in outer space. Shall we accord them the same courtesy of mocking their pursuit? Shall we disallow any and all discussion of their observations and expression from the classroom?