Are there Non-Religious Skeptics of Darwinian Evolution and Proponents of ID

I'd agree that intuitively it does seem that the processes that go on in biology can make one open to the idea of design.

I think trying to prove this in such a way that a layperson could conclude there were historical interventions by designers is harder. I tried digging into ID and like the Catholic theologian Feser I remain unclear how "information" is used in these arguments. It makes me think of the arguments for mind uploading and programs that magically turn the computers they run on conscious b/c (IMO) "information" is used in a slip-shod way there too. OTOH physicists such as [Brian] Josephson and Wolfgang Smith agree with ID conceptions of information and believe the idea of Complex Specified Information has merit.

There's a point where a layperson has to accept that the argument belongs in the hands of experts, which is unfortunate because it seems many who have this expertise are being biased b/c of their religious adherence to materialism or theism or something else.

Additionally we know that scientists continually seek to discuss their views with the public, hoping to get laypeople to come to their side on issues such as the correct interpretation of QM. But when the argument (or the counterargument) starts getting into complex math, to give an example, how many people can follow along?

Edit: This isn't to say there no design arguments that are accessible. I think the mystery of psycho-physical harmony (see here & here) is a good argument that can suggest design, though there are other options to explain it.

Perhaps I could digress a little from the question of religious or non-religious acceptance of ID over NS+RM and look at a non-religious but spiritual alternative view. Please excuse the unfettered speculation that follows.

I've read (as I'm sure many others on this forum have) accounts of spiritual entities in, shall we say, other dimensions who are advanced creative beings. These souls actually manifest novel plant and animal life forms by some sort of creative process that is never really explained. Perhaps those abilities are beyond our ken. When I say "manifest" I mean that I have read about what we might describe as "prototypes" so there does appear to be some sort of design process involved. However, we are not talking about God (in the religious sense) we are talking about groups of advanced souls whose "job" it is to create and maintain physical, organic life forms. Perhaps there are other creator souls who design eco-systems? Why not? Is that any more outlandish an idea than a single creator-God? For all we know, the group-creators might be considered to be local gods - not totally dissimilar to the pagan gods of old.

If we delve deeper into that idea we are bound to hit a sort of road-block when it comes to the question of how any designed life-form might be introduced into the physical biosphere. I am not inclined to believe that a pair of fully-formed humans a-la Adam & Eve were dropped into the garden. I do think that the painstakingly discovered biological processes are probably respected and followed. Therefore I assume that the designed DNA of a new species might be introduced into some kind of evolutionary close host and well-known evolutionary mechanisms such as NS and Epigenetics take over from there. I am not sure, however, that this process would fully explain the Cambrian Explosion and I suspect a more direct intervention from those other dimensions might have taken place back then.

When it comes to pondering these issues I have to remind myself that I am essentially an idealist so all of what we call "physical" or "biological" as well as the environment in which life evolves is actually mind-stuff. Precisely and meticulously organised mind-stuff to be sure but manifested and organised by consciousness.