No, in the sense that I.D. has no interest in replacing science, just destroying a false ideology which harms full and complete practice of science itself. Asking questions in today's reeducation camp environment is ok ... as long it is questions about accepted Darwinian Dogma. But to stifle questions outside the dogma - BECAUSE they are not 'scientific'? Have you ever noticed folks don't argue about gravity much? Why is that, but Darwin's 'logic' is so unpersuasive? Why are the bio sci classes never discussing why Darwin's Dogma is so upsetting, so hard to 'swallow', as compared to Gravity? WHERE ELSE are kids going to learn how to think? Oh, I keep forgetting ... learning how to think should be restricted to ... PHILOSOPHY class. That sounds really, really familiar. The USSR, Cambodia, etc, are examples of what you get if you meekly accept this kind of nonsense. So, how is this to happen?? But not firing a single shot. Yep, the Star Wars analogy is a pretty good one.
Excuse me, but the anti science crowd on this site routinely rejects physics, chemistry, geology, and astronomy.
Nearly all the anti-evolution crown on FR are completely unaware that the founders of the modern ID movement -- Behe and Denton -- accept common descent as a given.
> Have you ever noticed folks don't argue about gravity much? Why is that, but Darwin's 'logic' is so unpersuasive?
Because average people can watch a rock drop. But watching evolution happen takes rather more. The American public does not have much of an attention span. Certainly not enough to become educated about such a long-term process like evolution.
Creationism, however, takes about two seconds to explain: "God did it!", followed by one second of intense staring.
If you mean, have you ever noticed folks don't argue about Gravitational Theory very much (since the subject is the Theory of Evolution and not the laboratory-demonstrable physical phenomena of evolution or gravity), that's probably because most people aren't even sufficiently aware of such concepts as Frame Dragging or gravitons to even argue about them. I suppose if IDers wanted to make a big public spectacle of why Frame Dragging or gravitons are fraudulent theories that try to substitute Secular Humanist Physics for God, people would start questioning it, probably by misrepresenting the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and quoting Einstein out of context.
As for evolution and gravity (lowercase), as a previous poster pointed out, people don't argue against gravity because they can see a rock drop. And anyone even minimally scientifically conscious doesn't argue evolution because they see it in action every day. People wouldn't be concerned about a cross-species jump of avian flu if not for a basic acceptance of the concept of little-e evolution.