I think that is precisely the point. IDers, if I could speak for them, would maintain that there is more to creation and life than merely the physical components.
If that is true then a science which rejects all nonmaterial evidence/logic out of hand is inadequate to explain life. Yet many proponents of evo. hold forth the position that life can only be explained by its physical properties.
From this layman's POV "science", that is the academic elites, have for the last century or so been trying to put religion in a box, to marginalize it, and to force it out of the arena of important ideas. That explains the backlash.
I don't believe that IDers are anti-science, I know that I'm not. I do, however, believe that the box fitted out for religion by the scientific community is more appropriate for science itself. If science, and perhaps rightly so, cannot envision or account for a reality beyond materialism then it is self limiting and should, therefore, drop all "supranatural" claims at explaining life.
Of course I doubt that will happen, just as I doubt my opinioms will get even a second thought.