For example: a recent post by Christian CADRE's BK claiming scientists who criticize ID don't know what they're talking about. BK's training, by the way, is in law.
Quick note on the creationism issue: How exactly is ID not creationism? Because it's proponents take less extreme positions than the creationists? Nope. Philip Johnson refuses to take a position on the age of the earth, making him less accepting of the current scientific consensus than self-described old-earth creationists. Is it because their arguments are different? Nope. They spread the same blatant falsehoods that creationists used to. No difference in claims, no difference in arguments, what am I missing?