I've just about had it with this intelligent design debate. I find it is a dirty debate, filled with trickery and sneaky rhetoric. At the same time, it appears that most taking part in the debate (on both sides) are missing one of the most important points. Followers of ID can't handle it when they can't understand and explain everything, and need to attribute complexity to an intelligent designer. But there is nothing wrong with saying that something is not understood; it merely shows that you know what the way forward is to learn more.
Now, if we can just accept that the universe is incredibly complex, we can move forward. Evolution is a testable theory, and it can be used to predict events before they happen. ID is nothing of the sort, and appears to be the exact opposite; a convenient subset of observations seem to have been selected as "evidence" for ID.
How about focusing more on finding out the details we don't understand fully so we can concentrate on getting better, instead of just caving in and saying "it's just so"?.