The argument is fatally flawed.
To point otu some of the more serious errors.
Every evolutionary scientist must recognize that the fundamental tenet of organic evolution is the idea that life arose from non-living material substances such as chemicals.
They should certainly not "recognise" any such thing because it is not true.
Ironically, however, biological scientists have been testing this idea for centuries and have discovered that life in this Universe does not and cannot arise spontaneously from natural processes.
This is not true either. More accurately we have not yet discovered the circumstances under which life might arise, but it is a very difficult problem and research is continuing because progress is still being made.
THe comparison of ID with SETI is also false. SETI relies specifically on making assumptions about what the presumed intelligent source would do. ID advocates refuse to consider this issue at all. WHich is why ID does not generate testable hypotheses and that is one of the reasons why ID is not science.
The claims about IQ tests are simply bizarre. None of the ID arguments are based on anything like IQ tests, rather they are typically attempts to falsify evolution - and Behe's irreducible complexity argument is just such an argument (and one that has failed).
™ Version 4.2