And it uses it incorrectly. Do you believe that other intelligent life exists in the universe?
Yes. And as Calvin said, the best evidence for them being intelligent is that they haven't contacted us yet.
As for the "2001" hypothesis, it's possible, and I'd have absolutely no problem with it , but there's no evidence for it that I've seen.
That's the only part I need to know. It opens untold possibilities that fit the hypothesis.
These are a considerable number of trained mathematicians, statisticians, and scientists. They say they have correctly applied their model. Their opponents say they haven't.
If I can find an alternate explanation for the opponent's (evolutionist's) refutation of their work, then it is admissible by the rules of evidence. That alternate explanation is: religio/philosophical differences. Historically, that is a strong incentive to demean emerging theories. The evolutionists have, then, a philosophical and financial reason for opposition that requires the grant of some leeway to the IntelDesign folks.