I disagree completely.
The scientific issue of evolution began 200 years ago with the observation that the earth was obviously older than Genesis claimed. The prejudice of the day was that the Bible was literally true, and many scientists sought to prove it's truth. But the evidence said otherwise, and still does, and that's what science has concluded.
The Theory of evolution, which predated Darwin, has been researched innumerable times with no real evidence against it whatever.
The "ID movement", an outgrowth of the 70's "Creation Science" crowd, does no science (I don't doubt because they know they would fail). Their stated methodology is to pick at regular scientists work, searching for quotes, apparent contradictions, and making philosophical arguments in favor of ID. The lead ID organization, the Discovery Institute, joins in lawsuits, and conducts press releases. It is a political organization, not scientific.
The two "sides" are in no way similar. They conduct their work in a completely dissimilar manner. With dissimilar goals. The scientific community attempts to understand the physical world (and if that world contained a supernatural or off-earth "intelligence", no group would be more excited to prove such a discovery than they would). The ID proponents have a stated goal (the "Wedge" document), to gain the acceptance of the existence of a Christian God by the scientific community, thereby justifying their faith as the one true Faith.
The methodologies of the ID community of lawsuit, legislative board packing, and press release are the methods of the environmental community, not the scientific community.
The ID and scientific "sides" have no similarity whatever. As you can note in this forum, they talk past each other with different mindsets, just like you and I doing are right now.
Your argument seems to be that you embody and speak for all valid intellectual pursuit in this area, and woe betide anyone that should be so moronic to disagree with you. You talk about science as it were some sort idealized ediface rather than an practice and discipline that fallible human being pursue. SO be it.
You are completely missing my point, perhaps because you are accustom to canned, knee jerk responses to IDers around here.
ID vs. Evolution per se does not interest me from either side. What does interest me is the inability of the "Scientific Crowd" (with a few really powerful exceptions) to differentiate science from philosophy in their own minds, and their inability to understand what the "other side" is saying to them. I am also quite taken aback by the high handed rudeness of the "Evo" group.
I find talking to you pointless, as you are not even paying attention to what I am talking about. Perhaps you do not understand what I am saying, but whatever the story is, you are obviously up on a well worn hobby horse. Ride away, I am sorry I disturbed you.