There are some significant arguments to be made, in my view, along the lines
of evolutionary theory being the best scientific theory by far but NOT
therefore being either precisely and exhaustively true nor even being
demonstrably -likely- to be precisely and exhaustively true (perhaps it's
akin to Newtonian physics, e.g., and in any event ET's insight is limited to
the scientifically accessible aspects of the physical world, contra
Dawkins).
As a corollary, one could further argue that we should in principal be
prepared to accept things like ID theory -should they ever prove
empirically/scientifically superior- to evolutionary theory (which they
certainly don't -right now-).
But instead, from nearly all anti-evolutionary comers, we get some higher or
lower degree of rhetorical sophistication combined with scientific and
logical dross, pretty much always in the directions of grotesque caricature,
gross exaggeration, or just sloppy confusion.
It's a pity. It really is.
--John