Hmmm, "unintelligent design" . . . sounds like an oxymoron to me.

I have seen ATTEMPTS to argue it but they always seem to arrive at the same point - FAITH! In which you just have to BELIEVE that xyz is/worksin such and such a way.

The concept of "randomness" for example, there is no evidence that it is valid except that some processes "look" (presently) like they proceed unintelligently (no algorithm).

Well, it once LOOKED as if the Sun revolved around the Earth as well.

The only reason the concept of "randomness" (and MANY, MANY other "normal concepts) is BELIEVED is because of a reliance on absolute "determinism" (disbelief of all other possible explanations).

The word "random" is just a magical stand-in for "we-don't-know-how-this-works" and the only reason why we BELIEVE it is anything other than "magic" is because we discount (DISbelieve) ALL other possible explanation.

Perhaps what we see as "random" events are the result of a "decision" made on/at a level that we are not even aware of yet. (see, for instance: panpsychism (or etc.))