I hang out on a good number of message boards that discuss Intelligent Design and the like. On them, there is a general consensus among the science minded that ID is possibly the most dangerous part of a full scale attack on science.
However, the question was recently raised on how we define this "attack on science".
In and of itself, Intelligent Design is not an attack on science. It is a intellectually bankrupt attack on a particular branch of science, but not science in general.
So why do we still maintain that science is under attack?
Aside from ID, there are more than just this simple assault. Although it is often assosciated with ID, many people presume to challange the entire concept of methodological naturalism which posits that science can only look for non-supernatural causes for events given that supernatural ones are beyond testing. Their argument is that excluding these possible explanations limits what science is able to explain and thus, it will yield false results if the true answer lies outside the scope of investigation. This is surely a valid critisizm in that regard. However, if science is not able to answer something conclusively, it does not place the prohibition that philosophical or religious methods of inquiry must be banished.
This prong of attack has been very prominent recently, being manifested in Behe's admittance that, to include Intelligent Design as science, one must also include other non-naturalistic methods of investigation, such as astrology. Of course, that is only one person's opinion and not truly a credible threat. So what is a credible threat? The recent action of the Kansas school board, removing the stipulation that science seek only natural explanations, a position that will be taught to thousands of children, is a credible threat to science.
And keep in mind that this is not just biology that this redefinition is threatened by, but the foundation upon which all scientific investigation is founded. This means the damage moves far beyond biological sciences, but extends into chemistry, physics, astronomy, geology, etc...
Aside from these attacks, the attacks on the rest of the scientific fiels are also mounting. Dembski's recent hasty actions in ratting out an opinion with which he agreed to Homeland Security is an example of this. The censoring of scientists at NASA by unqualified media relations people ganining their job through cronyism is another. The long standing Young-Earth-Creationists make their attacks on far more fronts than just biology, as do non-religiously motivated anti-scientists, such as the moon hoax theorists, planet-X theorists, and others.
So, in short, Intelligent Design does not constitute an "attack on science" any more than a cough constitutes a flu. However, when combined with the sore throats, the fevers, sneezing, and other symptoms, the diagnosis can be firmly established: Science is under attack.