Science doesn't pretend to argue about ultimate causes, but it does attempt to analyze currently effective causes. The research program that would support ID is indistinguishable from one that would support evolution. There would be no difference in the materials or methods of research. ID proponents might choose different topics on which to spend research dollars, but they would have to have the same goal.
And that goal would be to find the natural chain of causes for phenomena. You cannot assert that something is designed without attempting to rule out natural causes. If and when you get down to bedrock causes -- the theory of everything -- then you can have a deep discussion of why things are the way they are.
If those claiming this stipulated the existence of a creator a whole lot of hostility and suspicion would go away.
At the moment, because of the way we "do" science (scientific materialism) --- the theory of evolution is used as intellectual authentication by the politically active metaphysical naturalists (atheists) - to promote their agenda which includes such things as bizarre animal rights, infanticide, euthenasia, etc.
This gives the left wing a wrongful political advantage which could perhaps be cured by strong protests to the effect that science does not speak to metaphysics at all and thus no more authenticates atheism than theism.
Scientists do frequently issue such protests - but they are one-sided against theists using science for authentication. I do not recall any such protests against the atheists' misuse.
Back to your original statement, js1138:
Simply put, evolution theory is only a framework and thus any assertion of impossibility can be rationalized to the contrary post hoc within the framework.
IMHO, rather than taking an adversarial position to such a moving target, ID would be more effective supporting the research within conventional science which disputes either of the two primary pillars of evolution theory: random mutation and natural selection - or which looks for answers to the questions not addressed directly by the theory: What is Life?, What is Consciousness?, etc.
It is not difficult to find such research within conventional science: lower (or non) mutability of regulatory control genes, self-organizing complexity, symbolizations, autonomy, biological information content, physics of the mind, etc.