ID claims the debunked idea of "irreducible complexity"... claiming that some parts of anatomy of some creatures are too complex to be mathematically possible through random chance.
The claim is mostly subjective and more the product of philosophers than life scientists. It seems to be that "This is all too wonderful and well-working to be a product of chaos."

Thus it is supposedly a hole in the concept of natural selection, which claims all the variation in life to come from trial and error of mutations against the environment, leading up to life as we know it over the course of billions of years.

Of course evolution is observed, but only in small changes... because we have not been around long enough to witness any special transformations. IDists seem to think that "macro" and "micro" evolution are seperate phenomena.

Of course science is discovering more and more about the diversity of life. It appears now that differences are not so much based on different genes as different chemical triggers within DNA that turn various genes on and off- thus leading to far greater variability and explaining why there is so little genetic difference between creatures.


Here's what gets me... The problem religionists have with evolution is that it is the result of chaos as opposed to God... So why develop a whole pseudo-theory?
Why not just suggest that the mutations that occur were programmed or are controlled by God rather than the result of chaos... Evolution can't really take a stance on that, as it is not provable. It would allow religionists to accept what science is affirming more and more... while still being able to keep the faith in some worldly order.

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III