Tell me more about the differences between how you have characterized the behavior of ID proponents and the behavior of the faulty scientists you described, if you would.
"Tell me more about the differences between how you have characterized the behavior of ID proponents and the behavior of the faulty scientists you described, if you would."
I don't really know anyone who pushes ID per se. Personally, I am a special creationist which would be the "far right" of those espousing religious beliefs to explain what we see around us. However, I gave up a long time ago trying to persuade anyone to agree with my position and I don't currently belong to any creationist organizations or even keep up with their literature. I still hold to a creationist position, I just don't like fighting about it - not a fruitful endeavor.
From what very little I know about ID, it is not particularly associated with creationists or other religious conservatives. It just simple a paradigm that sees "intelligence" in the design of life, not just randum chance. That seems very mild to me. I find it hard to believe that ID proponents are religious fanatics.
I have a BS in Microbiology (1980) from a secular university. I was witness then, and since, to how "religious" some zoology professors were about evolution. Even a hint that you didn't hold to their position and you were the equivalent of a heretic. It was their guiding paradigm. Goodness, just look how hyped the rhetoric can get here on FR (by both sides and the middle).
Hope this