I've not really voiced my opinion on the issue yet, partly due to being busy but I've been following the discussion to the best of my ability.
It seems to me the biggest problem or hurdle that ID needs to leap to be taken seriously is to do two things. First lay down some sort of standard or method by which you would scientifically declare something too complicated to not be designed (which would then need to be vetted by observable facts and probably modified several times), at least then there is objectivity in the decision.
Secondly, and perhaps more importantly show how declaring that something was designed in any way furthers scientific understanding, and would thusly be relevant to the scientific community. If the only contribution of this "theory" (using the term loosely) is to say "this was designed" I honestly don't see how that helps, particularly if we are to assume that the designer is claimed to be omnipotent and set out with the intent of making it appear natural.
I would also like to see them distance themselves from the idea that the implication of design naturally leads to the necessity of a God designer. A design does necessitate a designer, god is merely the only possible designer many of them choose to consider, but (and as much as I hate to go here) other options have equal evidence, for instance Aliens.
The mere fact that their proposal would lead us to make conclusions like "Aliens may have caused this." is what really makes me shake my head and say "This is not Science.". Ultimately I don't see where this has a place in Science but I think the issues I pointed out above are some great first steps that could be made to legitimize it if that is truly what they wish to do.
I continually see people clamor for ID to be taken seriously, and I would return that challenge and ask them to take Science and their own proposal seriously. If they wish to be accepted by the scientific community they should, by course of logic, make their proposal through Scientific channels. To date they have attempted to gain access to such channels but not the way scientists do, but rather by insisting that it be given to them. Hell the idea of ID changes depending on who you talk to, and there doesn't seem to be a "correct" ideology on the subject...that is a serious problem for an idea that wishes to be taken as science.
To put it simply: Put the work into your ideas and earn your time at the podium like every other idea.
 |
| To Each Man, Responsibility |
