Intelligent Science?

I have no idea how this little piece of information slipped under my radar, especially since I've been preparing to give a workshop on Intelligent Design v. Darwinism (don't worry, I'm going to come heavily down on ID if I can), but it appears as though a peer-reviewed journal has published an article in support of ID. Now granted, it is in a very low-impact journal for taxonomists, and has adequately been debunked, but it gives credibility to the movement which is largely just Creationism warmed over.

What I can't understand is how legitimate scientists get caught up in this trap. The Theory of Evolution is a scientific theory because it asks specific questions that can be proven or disproven. It makes no claims on the origins of life. I understand how some religious people may feel uncomfortable about evolution being one big string of epistatic accidents, but why put limits on the power of God? Since He's omnipotent and omniscient, why couldn't He have perfectly planned the architecture of life with random chance as one of its driving principles? Why do we have to constantly be finding jobs for God to do and try to fit Him into our feeble, limited worldview? And why do we have to co-opt science to make ourselves feel better about our faith? I can understand this crap from the Fundies, but there are a lot of other people jumping on the band-wagon, apparently because reconciling molecular evolution with a divine creator is too challenging. Well so is the Mystery of the Holy Trinity and Jesus's divinity and I don't see anyone coming up with stupid pseudo-theological theories about that (besides the Mormons, or course).

Intelligent Design is not science. It is a flawed misinterpretation of science and an incorrect application of the scientific method. It has to frequently ignore scientific evidence in order to proport the things it does and by allowing it into a scientific journal it does more damage to science than leaving it out does damage to religion. Some people can look at evolution and philosophize that God does not exist. Some people can look at evolution and be even more reassured than before that God indeed exists. And some people can point to evolution and say it was aliens who made us. There is no limit to the philosophies of the human mind. But no one can point to evolution and say confidently that it is proof of their philosophical position.

A casual observer might note that evolution seems to remain silent on the philosophies of Man. But that is exactly how science is meant to operate. It should report only what is testable and remain neutral to the philosophies of its handlers. Intelligent Design, however, does not, which means that ID has absolutely no place in a scientific journal, let alone in a science classroom.