Then don't read Dembski. His The Design Inference lays it all out rigorously. But considering your adverse reaction to this light essay, the book itself might stroke you out.
Uh huh. I have tried to dig into his book a couple of times, but to no avail. As best I can make out, I'd summarize his claim like this: "because we don't know how something happened, it must be impossible". This strikes me as an awful failure of imagination, but maybe it's just me.