Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
That's because they don't have an answer. It's not required to know who the designer is to use ID. Basically all ID says is that things which are more complex are more likely to have been designed (especially if that complexity is not natural, a la crystal formations).
That's maybe a guess, at best. Not a theory, not even a hypothesis.
In order to be considered, "ID" needs to be able to come up with some evidence that there is an intelligent designer.
We all know that this is just creationism in disguise... let's be honest here. That's why so many Christians are behind it (except the Pope... he says evolution is right!) and the science community is against it.