I may be a bit behind the curve, but it was my understanding that those who espouse ID merely believe there’s an Interlligent Designer behind the origins of the Universe and of life. In that respect, they’re right — science cannot disprove that premise. Then again, neither can it disprove it. If by ID you mean people who subscribe to a literal 7 24-hour period creation, I’m on your side. But just because you can prove life evolved doesn’t mean you can prove WHY it evolved. Belief in either a Divine Creator or random chance requires an equal amount of faith. I don’t believe that our schools should teach that evolution happened because God said so, but neither do I believe that they should teach that it happened just by accident, or that it disproves the existence of God. And I can’t believe your Maximumness thinks that isn’t exactly what happens.

Brian points out a very good point. Science is not equipped to determine why’s or any concept outside the facts. Science is epistomological not metaphysical or ethical. It is ethically neutral. Neither the evolutionists nor the IDers can prove their case, they can only interpret already existing data. Most emphatically they cannot disprove or prove an Intelligent Designer with the facts. That is a matter of belief not logic, which ever direction the belief goes.