Chuck, you don't start a scientific investigation by targeting High School education. That should be obvious to anyone. ID is not and never has been a primarily scientific enterprise, and anyone familiar with the history of the ID movement knows it.
Sometimes you shall notice how sneaky people are when it is said that "speciation is done in lab" or "natural selction is done in lab" they never mention on what and from what? On human from a single cell?
What is so sneaky about telling the truth ? Anyone with any understanding of evolution would know what is meant by speciation, and would know that it does not refer to generating a human being from a single celled life form.
Chuck, since you approve of Hawkins' silly nonsense, you can offer your answer, too.
The primary problem with creationism - which explains the issue raised in the OP is the egocentricity of the typical creationist. They start with the belief that their views are inherently superior to any alternatives.
This is why creationists make claims about what the evidence shows, without having investigated the evidence.
This is why creationists feel that any excuse to dismiss contrary evidence is adequate.
This is why creationists jump to conclusions based on a superficial look at the evidence - and sometimes even complain that others actually dare to look at the evidence in more detail and find out that the creationist is wrong.
This is why creationists regard any criticism of somebody on "their" side as wrong - even if it is true - while happily making and supporting attacks on their opponents, even if those attacks are false.
This is why creationists reverse the meaning of "biased" and "unbiased".
This is why there unresolvable conflicts between creationists. Each starts with the view that their own version is better and neither will change their minds.
In short, to answer the OP, the only options that typically matter to creationists are rivals that are strong enough to be a threat (which are "wrong" and must be disproven) and their own views (which are "obviously" true to everyone). Anything else need not be considered.