But I don't see why a few examples of unexplained phenomena is devastating to evolution, especially when it appears that science is making headway on those examples without invoking a designer.
Those of the Discovery Institute (DI) are generally vague about how their design details fit into the big picture. They won't take any stand on the age of the Earth. And seemingly, they refuse to admit that their design considerations are (at best) details in what is mainstream evolutionary theory. Personally, I prefer "God in the details" over "God of the gaps".
Dembski is citing Michael Behe material. Behe is, IMO, a theistic evolutionist, accepting the bulk of the mainstream theory of (biological) evolution. Dembski would seem to be the same. Their "design" is trying to document God having, at least to some small degree, guided evolution.
The DI seems to want to have it both ways - They are essentially old Earth evolutionists, but they don't want to disassociate and/or alienate themselves from the young Earth creationist (YEC) ID crowd.
Moose
Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith
"Nixon was a professional politician, and I despised everything he stood for ” but if he were running for president this year against the evil Bush-Cheney gang, I would happily vote for him." - Hunter S. Thompson
"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose