The synopsis: Religion and brute force failed to quash the idea of Darwinian evolution. Creationists and their Bible verses just irritated nonbelievers. Now Intelligent Design (ID) tries to topple Darwin again, not by offering a viable alternative, but by trying to co-opt the same concepts that have raised science to its current strength. Unfortunately for them, that argument would also open the door to a number of other alternative “theories,” all just as unscientific as Intelligent Design:
[All of these] will have to be let in, or the whole program must collapse under howling derision and accusations of hypocrisy.
Not that the people behind ID have any trouble with their own hypocrisy.
(And yes, the unscientific alternatives include my personal favorite, the “simulation” hypothesis. I support Darwinian evolution as the only viable scientific theory for how life originally arose, but I also think that this reality isn’t the original. It can’t be proven, and thus is not scientific, but I suspect the reason for this is deliberate. As such, that argument doesn’t dissuade me from it.)