Is ID scientific ? Yet another approach to the question.

I don't see why this is neccessarily the case at all, I have heard several contrary arguments stretching from the idea that geenetic perfection has undergone severee degradation since 'The Fall' to the point that the intelligent designer doesn't have to be constantly tinkering and interfering with everyones genes, he is only needed at those few points in evolution where a system must be created which is irreducibly complex and therefore unevolvable, supposedly, and the rest of the time he can leave evolution ticking over on its own. Both of these would be ID and neither would require virtualy all DNA to be imbued with purpose. Thats funny, because none of the reams of work based around the discovery of functions for DNA previously thought to be junk seems to have come from the ID camp, and much of it has come from the evolutionary approach. In fact one of the best ways to identify functional DNA of any type is to look for conservation of particular sequences across a broad range of species, a technique rooted in the evolutionary approach.Where is the ID based work on this issue? Surely that is what we should really expect to see if this idea is so fundamental to ID?TTFN,WK