Well, it doesn't matter of ID is assumed to be wrong or right. ID does not make any predictions. It does not have any explanitory powers. It can not be tested.
So far, the only thing that the major proponents of ID have done is point to the places we are ignorant about, proclaimed "It's too complex to happened naturally", and then say 'Oh, it must be a designer'.
When the I.D. proponents come up with a valid method of testing their ideas, then it can be considered. They are more interested in the politics of getting it in schools rather than the science of making it predictive and testable.