Darwinians habitually brand intelligent design theory as a “God-of-the-gaps” argument. On that characterization, we can already explain most things naturalistically. Intelligent design theory tries to find room for God in the residual blanks that have yet to be explained naturalistically.
Of course, that way of casting the issue tries to shift the burden of proof onto the intelligent design theory. Compared to the Darwinian naturalist, the intelligent design theorist labors under a handicap.
Yet remember Richard Dawkins’ now-classic, naturalistic definition of biology:
Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose. The Blind Watchmaker (1996) p.1
But in that event, it’s the Darwinian naturalist who operates at a disadvantage. He must overcome the prima facie appearance of design. The onus lies on him to surmount the presumption of purpose. So it’s actually the theory of naturalistic evolution that’s laboring to create or exploit gaps in the phenomenal telos of nature to make room for purely naturalistic explanations.