They aren't.
But lying about what is and is not science is. EG, by saying an untestable hypothesis like ID is a scientific theory.
If it were, then there would be some potential observation that would falsify it, like a Precambrian rabbit or an ERV found in the same position in the genome of chimps and gorillas, but not in people would falsfy ToE.
Because the posers of the hypothetical designer are not specified, there is no conceivable observation that can't be "explained" be saying "Oh, that's just the way the designer did it". In other words, ID is vacuous.
"posers" should be "powers"
"But lying about what is and is not science is."
There is no lying except on the Darwinian side.
"by saying an untestable hypothesis like ID is a scientific theory."
First of all, you are mistaken that Popperism is the only model of scientific inquiry. That is a patently false statement. Meyer has written extensively on the demarcation arguments, and there isn't one that excludes ID and not evolution.
However, given that, there are many hypotheses under the ID umbrella that are falsifiable. Irreducible Complexity certainly is, and Behe has given examples time and time again. Likewise, the hypotheses set forth in The Privileged Planet are likewise testable.
Note that finding a rabbit in the Cambrian won't falsify evolution. Similar things have already happened. A mammal was found about 100 million years before it was supposed to be there. Vertebrates were also pushed back by an extraordinary amount by finds in China. Yet ToE remains undisturbed.
I'm pretty sure the ERV one has already been falsified, but I will look into it.
So, you can only exclude ID by (a) pretending that there is only one definition of science, which is false, and (b) pretending that no ID hypotheses are testable, which is likewise false.
"If it were, then there would be some potential observation that would falsify it, like a Precambrian rabbit or an ERV found in the same position in the genome of chimps and gorillas, but not in people would falsfy ToE."
Then the theory of evolution has been falsified!
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11378389&query_hl=5&itool=pubmed_docsum
Don't worry, I know you didn't really mean it anyway. Darwinists like to pretend that evolution is falsifiable, but they don't actually follow through with it. I don't necessarily blame them per se, except for being self-deluded enough to think that such things would actually falsify the theory of evolution.