Honestly, I don’t claim to know how life originated or evolved, but I am virtually 100% certain that it couldn’t have happened without intelligent design of some kind or other.
When a person dies, the police can sometimes determine that the death was the result of murder — even if they don’t have a clue who committed the murder.
The claim that ID is “unscientific” because we don’t know who the Designer is, or because we cannot “study” the Designer, is logically equivalent to saying that the police cannot conclude that a murder was committed until they know who the murderer is and what the murderer’s motives were. It’s just plain nonsense.
When scientists discovered that Newtonism did not work for large and small scale problems, they did not spend their time proving Newtonism wrong. The spent their time and effort proving that the theories of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics were right. You did not see papers from Einstein or Heisenberg titled "Newtonism and me" as you do from Gilder with "Evolution and me."
The day someone presents experimental results that prove ID, I will be among the first to accept ID. Even in this event I will not reject Evolution just as no one rejects Newtonism. Newtonian mechanics work well within it's domain. Evolution does and will continue to work well within it's domain even if ID is proven true.