Since ID has not been taught for many, many years in public schools but evolution has been taught over and over inserted into almost every subject is it no wonder that ID is not understood or believed by many scientist today. If we kept teaching with certainty that the world was flat and the idea that the world was round and any and all supporting evidence was banished from all learning institutes we would not get very far but remain in darkness. It is very important for many to deny the existence of God. The belief in evolution must be protected to deny the existence of God and the restraints of God upon one's life and upon one's ego that fancies him/herself to be their own God and proudly refuses to bow down to the one and only living God. Also macro-evolutionary belief must remain the only belief system allowed as to keep grant money coming in for many, many unnecessary studies that keep university money and individual pay checks coming in. Above all else it must be avoided at all cost ever having to admit that oneself and one's illustrious educational institute was so foolishly and vehemently wrong.
And yet, many, if not most, of the giants in the history of science got there because they realized the accepted explaination was wrong, and there was a better solution.
These days the IDs cannot come up with a reasoned answer
Evolutionary Gene Origin (EGO) beats ID for thinking people.
ID is not "believed" simply because it suggests no lines of research. ID presupposes that certain biological structures could not have evolved. In science this is called a null hypothesis, and the obvious response is to conduct research towards falsifying that hypothesis. (There is no way to prove such a hypothesis except by repeated failure to falsify it.)
This is exactly what mainstream science is doing, working to find naturalistic explanations for so-called irreducible structures. This is what science does. This, apparently, is not what ID does.
Feel free to falsify this post by presenting an overview of the ID research program. What are its goals and accomplishments?
Where's your asbestos suit?
Or are you just a masochist?
(Turns away, holding hands over eyes, exclaiming,"Oh no! I can't look!")
And yet another creationists dishonestly asserts that evolution = atheism.
"Since ID has not been taught for many, many years in public schools but evolution has been taught over and over inserted into almost every subject is it no wonder that ID is not understood or believed by many scientist today."
Whoa, we aren't talking about a 'good idea' here. If evolution didn't work, researchers from all life sceinces would know tomorrow. Evolution is NOT a static model. It makes predictions. Scientists use thes epredictions, same way they use the predictions made by gravity (ie, things fall when you drop them). If these predictions did not work, then it would be very obvious, very quickly.
For instance, do a search for 'Pikaia.' It's a stochastic method for minnimizing/maximizing a function, based on natural selection. I used this algorithm to minimize a function for optimizing ballistic trajectories in a computer program. We also implemented 2 purely mathematical, deterministic algorithms, downhill simplex and golden search. Pikaia found the best answer for a function with 18 inputs QUICKER than the purely mathematical models. Ok, if you are not a mathematician or engineer, that likely doesn't make sense, but it worked. If evolution was a hoax, there is no way it would work better than mathematical models to solve a complex problem like minimizing a function with 18 inputs each with at least 10 decimal places. That is a very, very complicated problem.
We could teach scientists ID when they are young, but when they get older and realize ID has no predictive power, they would quickly dismiss it as unscientific, just like they do now.