Are theistic evolutionists really IDers?

Well, for one thing, a "creator" doesn't have to be a "designer." There are quite a few things I create (mostly as a waste function) that I have absolutely no design in. So, just because someone belives in a creator, it does not imply that creator designed anything.

That could be. But now we need to define what ID means. If ID refers to solely designing the Universe, then you could say that TEists are IDists. However, the ID movement seems to say that an "Intelligent Designer" directly designed all of life, especially humans. If that is the definition of ID, then TEists would NOT agree with that.

I agree. Randman seems to be trying to conflate two possible definitions of ID. Using one to show equality, then a different one to prove his point. I was trying to get him to state exactly what he defines ID as, so we can figure out exactly what his argument is saying.

Under that definition, then yes, most theologies would seem to be a form of ID. As such, it is not a science, it is a belief.Unfortunately, that is not the type of ID being espoused by the ID movement in America. It is this movement that is anti-science. It is this movement that is trying to force its way into science class and erode confidence in evolution among the next generation of Americans.