The only plausible explanation for how these incredible systems came into being is intelligent design,"
The idea of "naturalism", whether philosophical or methodological, undergirds all of "natural science", but it's neither an observed fact, nor a confirmed theory, nor even a falsifiable hypothesis.
Rather, it's simply an assumption, in essence a "let's pretend" foundation on which the entire vast scientific edifice is constructed.
Naturalism, in effect, says: "let's pretend there are only natural explanations for natural processes, and let's see where that takes us."
So naturalism by definition underlies all of science and any explanations which are not naturalistic lie outside the realm of natural science.
Such explanations may be perfectly valid philosophy, or theology, or just "space aliens did it".
But by definition, they are not natural-science.
Now science has never, ever, pretended to "know everything" about everything, indeed, one great art to science is in asking just those questions for which a natural explanation can be found.
That's why nobody has yet proposed a detailed theory on the natural origin of life, or of DNA.
Science doesn't know the answers and scientists are, as yet, unwilling to say: "maybe space aliens did it".
Of course there are now many ideas floating around as to how life may have originated, but nobody has yet demonstrated a complete sequence of natural events, nor, so far as we know, is anybody likely to anytime soon.
But if & when they do, a mere $10 million will not be anywhere near adequate reward, by orders of magnitude.