Have you read any of the treatises on ID? Highly scientific (even if you disagree with their premise and conclusion) and do not belong on the "Religious" shelves at the bookstores.
I read Behe's "Darwin's Black Box". Does that count?
Behe is very scientific when discussing flagellum or blood clotting or the eye, but that is in there to "prove" how complex the system is.
The conclusion reached from that discussion is philosophical in nature, in the never very humble opinion of this commentator with a degree in philosophy (yes, martha, we do exist). That one is a scientist does not lead necessarily to the conclusion that the position held by said scientist is, in fact, a scientific position.
Irreducible complexity is a philosophical position. That we infer design from irreducible complexity is another layer of that philosophical position.
JMO.