http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/07/01/what-happened-before-the-big-bang/

When did we the “Big Bang” enter into the conversation?
The simple idea that you have to go all the way back to the foundations of the Universe to find the big remaining question of our time speaks directly to the strength of the evolutionary theory.

I will definitely concede your point, I (and I don’t think anyone else) don’t have any idea of the state of the foundational matter that makes up our universe before the Big Bang. But I think that’s missing the point. What you call Science’s dirty little secret is not a scientific question at all, right now it’s a philosophical discussion. Maybe someday it will become a scientific one. What happened before the Big Bang beloves in philosophy or religion classes, not science classes. To suggest that we should accept ID because we don’t know what happened before the Big Bang just doesn’t cut it. To say this points towards the Aristotelian Prime Mover idea just reinforces it as a philosophical idea.

In so many ways, you sound like an ancient hunter-gatherer, trying to explain the seasons without any knowledge of planetary motion. Confronted with completely inexplicable observations, you fall back on ‘the gods did it.’ I wish it were that simple. And one more thing, I think God is embarassed for us when we invoke his name in explaining the universe… in my world view, when people say things like that, God just shakes his head and says, “man, they’re just not looking hard enough.”

Finally, the eye and knee are great examples of how evolution has worked and not worked. We have the eyes of carnivores, binocular, focusable and able to see across the color spectrum. Truly awesome, but totally explainable in evolutionary terms. Knees, well I go back to my earlier statements, they need a bit of refinement, maybe someplace somewhere, a child has been born with a crazy genetic mutation: knees like large wading birds. They’ll bend backwards when he/she runs, distribute weight more evenly and not tend to ‘blow out’ when you try to spin towards the basket after coming down with a rebound. Well we can hope right.

Oh, and please don’t cheapen your thoughtful post by saying all sciences are ‘converging’ on the idea of ID. That’s just not right, and if you (as you asay) are really speaking from observation, you know you’re reaching.