I’m going to shout “Amen!” again.
This is yet another reason why I’ve found most of the “ID theory” I’ve read to be philosophy and not science. There seems to be lots of confidence in the various authors’ intuition and philosophical underpinnings as various science topics are discussed but little rigorous scientific methodology, especially the intensive statistics of hypothesis testing.
Moreover, isn’t this lack of statistical rigor also the reason why “ID theory” has been around for decades but has (from what I can see) produced no impressive testable hypotheses leading to interesting scientific discoveries?
As always, these are just my impressions as a non-biologist. As a Christ-follower I’m fine with a universe created by an omniscient intelligent designer. (Even so, the Wedge Document was rather disturbing to me, for reasons which I don’t think are hard to grasp.) That said, I’d be happy to get corrected on anything I’ve misunderstood about “ID theory.”