That has been done in the literture I have mentioned.
You have mentioned lots of literature and authors and some of them are quite inconsistent with each other. They are inconsistent if not directly through stated disagreements (as seen in Ratzsch vs Dembski), then in logical disagreements between models they are espousing.
I guess this is to say that too many creationists of all stripes are taking advantage of ID and saying the exact same thing you are... it's in the literature.
It is time that you be very specific and explain which authors you hold to be correct and NOT part of the creationists glomming onto valid ID theory, as well as which ones are the creationist camp and you disagree with.
It might also be important, to delineate it as a scientific pursuit, what model is being pursued? Once and for all, are your FOR OR AGAINST common descent (regardless of underlying biochemical mechanism)? Are you for or against our knowledge regarding fossilization?
And what happens if biological Creation is scientifically validated by baraminologists?
I thought you said that baraminology had nothing to do with creationism at all?
holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)