I fail to see how any result of the Kitzmiller case could “subvert” something s broad as “modern science.” We are, after all, talking about the opinion of a judge and jury on a matter of which they have small knowledge. The case in point was the right of a school board to prescribe what is taught. Schoolboards have done far more to subvert science by choosing to hire teachers who know more about football than chemistry and yet have installed them in chemistry labs.
The result is irrelevant. It is only one example where the DI tries to push ID far outside the scope of any scientific merit. They claim ID is purely scientific, but in truth it can't stand on scientific merits so they have a large PR and legislative campaign to support it. Yes, they actually have what is essentially a PR/lobbying arm that contacts legislators, school boards, teachers and parents.
I have a HUGE distrust for a "science" that got popular due to political, social and/or religious motives. Case in point: Global Warming.
Schoolboards have done far more to subvert science by choosing to hire teachers who know more about football than chemistry and yet have installed them in chemistry labs.
That's another issue. A very valid one for sure, but still another issue.