Global warming is a special case. It has been latched onto by various political powers early on and promoted beyond its merits. Long ago it was already hard to get research grants unless it was sure a scientist was going to support AGW because the governments and NGOs had already seen the power they could have in advancing AGW.
Natural Selection was formed in a hostile environment, where in a highly religious age claims of heresy and blasphemy abounded. It's proponents risked ridicule and shame, and even legal repercussions. Yet it survived on the merits, eventually becoming the dominant scientific theory in the field.
Intelligent Design is trying to pull a Global Warming. The proponents have plans to leverage political bodies, the courts and apologetics to try to force the belief to prominence, starting with the faithful who would believe it only because of their religious beliefs, regardless of scientific merit. They do not intend for ID to become dominant on its merits, and they do not even promote it for scientific reasons.
Center for Scientific Creation - In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood
I've read this before. The author should be embarrassed.
GW - yes it is a special case - a microcosm of how culture, peer-review and consensus can all be used to perpetrate a fraud on the public. Evolution has just been around a lot longer and spent less time under the ‘microscope’ of critical thinking.
NS - from a hostile environment? Wasn’t it a catholic monk who determined the science of natural selection and gene transfer. Hardly a hostile environment.
ID - while I do not agree w/ the wedge strategy I do see that everything in the universe shows intelligent design.
Scientific study is the application of logic or of trying to uncover the rules that govern the structure(s). Life and creation are way too intricate and inter-twined to be attributed to chance. Since ID is not the hot topic it once was I can only conclude you have an ulterior motive for bringing it up now.