Due to my literal understanding of the biblical texts you say I cannot be an evolutionist of any stripe, but that plainly does not follow. I am a theistic evolutionist.I'm also a theistic evolutionist, but apparently of a very different stripe. In your mind, what drives selection and mutation? If your answer is God, you're not necessarily wrong (although I think you are), but you have to understand that your view is outside of the answerable purview of science.
I simply accept that God engineered the creation to include genetic drift within limits, or that this phenomena is effected by what the biblical texts denote as the fall and its consequences. To say this notion is outside the purview of science to apply to me what you are unwilling apply to yourself, namely a shaping principle which in and of itself is indeed beyond the purview of empirical science.
I do not think your point of view to be stupid or unreasonable or even unscientific. It is a piece of cake to take up the same "explanations" you have and entertain them for a while. Ultimately, however, it is my opinion that too much matter behaves too consistently to be a product of unguided forces of nature. Call it religion or philosophy if you will. When you get to making statements about the general nature of what you observe, please allow me the courtesy of calling it philosophy, too.
In short, you cannot object to the idea of intelligent design on the basis of empirical science. Neither can I object to the idea of a happenstance universe on the same basis.