Both in biology and related sciences, and math and physics, ID presents very specific positive evidence.
Well I certainly haven't seen any positive evidence, only "this can't be due to evolution" style stuff. I appreciate that you see it differently rand, but I think we're just going to have to disagree on this point for now.
What is important here is the opinions of atheist evolutionists about ID are pretty similar to the opinions of most theistic evolutionists, i.e. we believe that ID has no evidence and relies on fallacies.
I would think theistic evos, at least those that believe God intended on man being created, think that evolution and so-called "natural" processes are God's "tinkering."
Not quite. If God created the universe with the foreknowledge that humanity would eventually evolve without his subsequent interference, then there is no need for the very direct and hands-on interference suggested by IDers.
The basic difference is that IDers claim that evolution is insufficient explanation for complexity. Theistic evolutionists see evolution as being a perfectly adequate explanation, even if they do see the process of evolution as having been originally kick-started by God.
There is doubtless a fair degree of difference of opinion within the spectrum of opinion that we might usefully term "theistic evolution", but trying to shoehorn ID in there seems a step to far in my opinion.
So are you arguing that theistic evos believe in an Intelligent Designer despite all the evidence being there is no Designer?
That is my opinion yes, if we are using the term "intelligent designer" in a loose sense, but I don't think that many theists would see it my way. You have to remember that I think that anyone who believes in God does so despite the lack of evidence in favour and the wealth of alternative naturalistic explanations for phenomena traditionally associated with God(s), such as creation of life, causing weather, etc.
Mutate and Survive