Why only one Designer

ID does not require a single designer.I assume that a significant proportion of ID proponents come from a mono-theistic religous background, and they therefore assume their designer to be a single entity.Those individuals when asked to consider multiple designers will probably reject the idea and come up with some reason for doing so (e.g. multiple designers are not necessary to explore the 'theory').Since it is hard to point precisely to what it is about the Universe around us that screams 'I was designed', finding the conceptual differences one would expect from a multi-designer as compared to a single-designer hypothesis is ... well ... a bit tricky.ID (for me) makes little sense in any case; after all if all complex entities must be designed, so was the designer ... then who designed it ... and who designed it's designer ... ad nauseum.If we can get back far enough to find a complex, yet not designed entity then ID is, by definition, false.And since that is the ONLY possible starting point ... ID is clearly false.

Since our only reference point for design is the design that we (humans) perform, the link between common components and a single designer is not present.When we design an automobile it consists of a large number of interacting systems, each of which has a separate design team, and yet each of which use common technologies.When we design a aeroplane -- the technologies are the same as automotive technoloigies, and yet the design teams are different and numerous.In short, designs can be interpreted as a hierarchy of increasing complexity -- each layer upwards being based upon the units underneath.In the same way that one can consider Physics to underpin Chemistry which underpins Biology. There are 'new' features at each level, despite being based upon a common set of 'rules' under-the-hood.So is there any other evidence that there is a single designer?Also, is there actually anything in ID theory(?) that precludes mulitple designers -- or in fact makes any comment on the number of designers necessary?

Since any intelligent designer(s) would be capable of designing in any way they chooose ... spotting the difference is impossible.For ID it's not even necessary.The argument (if you want to call it that) is that biological systems are just too darn complex to have arisen by natural processes.