Critiques of Evolution Need Not Be Scientific

Intelligent Design (ID) doesn't itself need to qualify as a science to stand as a just critique of the scientific theory of evolution. Science can be criticized legitimately on nonscientific grounds, because science rests on a set of metaphysical assumptions (such as the temporal flow of causality, the constancy of the laws of nature, and a reality that corresponds to empirical data). Science's metaphysical assumptions and the theories built on them can be challenged on philosophical and even theological grounds. Problem is, the advocates of ID keep insisting that their argument is scientific, which it is not. It's fine philosophy but falls short of being science. They should just give up the claim to science, and attack from other directions.