If you separate intelligent design from the religious aspect then fine you have theory, I have a theory, we all do. That's not what happens. Your argument is that they have holes in their theory that they won't admit to. Fine, I can agree with that. You want to replace it with a theory that is one big hole because it's made up with no science behind it. Just your use that micro evolution has been proven means that there is a good chance that scientist are on the right track with macro evolution. It might be wrong but it swings more in the way of evolution that intelligent design.
Science is not about having answers. Science is about finding answers and you start that with a theory. You either prove or disprove that theory and move on. Is their politic in today's science world? Sure there is just like with everything else in life. But over all they stick to their basic principles, trying to find answers. If a scientist believes in intelligent design it's his job to try to prove that theory but using science principles. If he can't do that then you don't get to teach it in schools.
Science is not about having answers. Science is about finding answers and you start that with a theory. You either prove or disprove that theory and move on. Is their politic in today's science world? Sure there is just like with everything else in life. But over all they stick to their basic principles, trying to find answers. If a scientist believes in intelligent design it's his job to try to prove that theory but using science principles. If he can't do that then you don't get to teach it in schools.