And I am reminded that the modern aerospace industry uses mathematical computer modeling to design and TEST FLY their current futuristic designs. Seldom do they build a proto-type before it's been 'FLOWN' benefit of the computer age.
The ID modeling was via that computer-age system.
You would do better to castigate it via some of the enviro-wacko, warm Earth modeling that takes place also using math modeling. The issues always become the assumptions that you put into the computer. Garbage in equals garbage out.
Why do I point out a better method for you to argue against my position? Because my intent is honesty and not some preconceived position.
The correct method is to propose an alternate math model with different but valid assumptions while recognizing the strengths and weaknesses of the prior model.
No one has done that. They're so damn busy being "against religion" that no one is bothering to be diligently honest.