I would suggest that it can be science and can be argued scientifically (mathematics) -a specific conclusion can not be proven; however, the same can be said of evolution's specific conclusion (cause)...
Keep in mind that evolutionists observe change over time (facts) and theroretically postulate an unproven cause of this (random chance)... To support the unproven case reuires faith..
On the other had ID suggests that the mathematical probabilities required to support the 'random' theory are impossible...
A Mathematical Proof of Intelligent Design In Nature
"Science can purify religion from error and superstition. Religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes."-Pope John Paul II
There are too many uncertainties about exactly how biology works for mathematics to be useful in discrediting evolution. It's an attempt to prove a negative (that evolution is impossible) that fails on it's face.
On the other hand, the number of individual actions such as cell divisions, gene turn on/off actions, etc are so huge that to believe that an intelligence is controlling things at that detail is just not believable.
And since we don't see, hear, feel, or electronically measure an intelligence in action at any level, I don't think He exists.
There was some earlier discussion on astrology, and whether it is science. Perhaps since religion is attacking science, maybe science should turn some of it's attention to religion to see whether any of it's claims are valid.
I'm sure they will conclude that Jesus existed. But so did Mohammed. And I don't doubt they will find zero evidence for a deity, except in the emotions and faith of the believers.
A calculation that is rife with inaccuracies and inappropriate initial assumptions.