I think it's worth mentioning that intelligent design is in no way a science. It is a religion. It starts with an answer, then looks for ways to support the answer that must be true. In science you start with a question and go where the answer takes you. Even if it contradicts your beliefs.
Actually, looking for "intelligent design" is not a religion. As practiced and conceived, it typically is a search for evidence or proof of a supreme being. This is a logical fallacy. If we did find evidence of intelligent design, what it would prove is the existence of a "prior intelligence of high order". EG, something millions of years ago that was pretty darn smart. If someone makes the leap from that to thinking they found proof of a supreme being, that's their problem.
When we go listen on big radio telescopes for ET, we are looking for radio waves that are "intelligent designed". That is no religion, obviously. Neither is it science unless you conceive of it in terms of the null hypothesis. But simply listening to signals and reviewing them for patterns doesn't pass my smell test for "science". Finding a dinosaur bone or looking at a star in the sky is not science and does not require science. Science may be performed upon those observations, of course.