The first is that the question being debated by just about everyone who has written a letter on this topic recently is Should we teach creation science (I just threw up in my mouth a little) in high school science classes? You are correct that the origins of life and the universe are shrouded in mystery. You are also correct that the designer can neither be proven nor disproven, moving that debate into the venerable field of philosophy.
I think you missed the point that the only sort of philosophy one should teach in a science class is the scientific method. The danger is in teaching junk science for the purpose of bolstering a non-scientific theory. As soon as there is a convincing test for a designer, then we should put intelligent design into the science classroom.
The problem with the question Where did this information come from? is a misunderstanding of information theory. Every time a cell replicates, it duplicates its information (DNA); now there is more information.
But, where did that information come from? It takes energy to perform that duplication because that energy had information in it. Any energy that is organized enough to be used for work has information. There is a local change in the quantity of information without the use of divine intervention. DNA information can be created in this way using non-DNA information.
You made the claim that Hochenauer should stick to teaching English because he was out of his depth. Then your letter goes on to butcher information theory. Maybe you should leave that up to electrical engineers, like myself, or the quantum physicists. I would recommend the Massachusetts Institute of Technologys OpenCourseWare website. It has a course Information and Entropy, which is free and you can watch the lectures at home!
Lastly, one does not need to be a subscriber to junk science to still have an earnest and abiding faith in God and the son of man. Your assertion otherwise is both shameful and untrue.
John R. Junger III