This article is truly hard to refute, except by saying "it's dumb" ...
ID will win out for the very reasons that he states, just as Relativity won out over Newtonian physics. Most of the time Newtonian mechanics works just fine, but it is in the breach that it is proven insufficient.
Relativity did not 'win out' over Newtonian physics. Newtonian physics is the basic material taught in undergraduate science classes. Relativity is a refinement of Newton for more extreme conditions.
Your statement theat ID will 'win' over evolution has two problems when compared to your physics example. First, by making this statement, you are arguing that evolution is real and ID further refines evolution. In other words, you are saying that ID incorporates evolution which means you support evolution.
Secondly, and more importantly, you are saying ID offers and extrapolation of evolution. It offers testable predictions that evolution does not have. Unfortunately, you don't understand that ID makes no testable predictions and offers no new insight. It is a supposition at best and has no observed evidence to support it. Nor does it have any means of testing to falsify it. Therefore, it is not science and it does not 'fill the gaps.' Remember, EVERY scientific theory has gaps, but that is not sufficient to invalidate those theories.