I would argue that a chronology of exactly what was predicted when is not dispositive as to whether a positive argument can be made.
Richard Dawkins predicted that “a large fraction” of our genomes has no function, because, “The true ‘purpose’ of DNA is to survive, no more and no less.”
As for the “God of the gaps” charge, the basic objection is that ID is an argument from ignorance, based upon what we don’t know.
To borrow geologist Charles Lyell’s words, intelligent agency is a cause “now in operation” that can be studied in the world around us.
What do scientists spend more time thinking about — sex, or the theory of intelligent design?