And your analogy of the robot being different from its inventor. Sure the nature of it is different. But would an intelligent creator make something that goes against his wishes?
Here you are once again attempting to force a discussion of originator and/or origin into the picture. The robot can be analyzed and recognized as known design even if the originator is never identified. The personality, capabilities, tastes, and even nature of the originator cannot be divined purely from a study of the robot. Perhaps you do not think humans are intelligent—and I think you'd have a strong case for it—but often in our history we have created things that go against our wishes.
Just as evolution theory does not attempt to prove origin theories intelligent design does not have to support any particular theory regarding the designer to establish the likelihood of design as evidenced by the results.
I think you're missing the very basic concept of evolution. If random choice produces traits that don't promote survivablity, then these traits tend not to be inherrited.
I think we are missing a more basic question that evolution has never answered: why should anything survive? Why should any bacteria eat chemicals in the first place? Why should any collection of protein bindings and amino acids ever have multiplied to begin with? You are talking inherited traits, a concept that only impacts self-replicating life. Why should life have ever propogated? Sand doesn't propogate. Water doesn't propogate.
It is incredibly unlikely that life should have survived at all on this planet. It has been noted that life has an amazing capacity to adapt in order to survive, but why should it have that capacity? There is surely no need for life to survive, so why does it seem so plainly driven to do so?
[edit to add] There is no doubt that single-celled life forms terraformed this entire planet into a place more suitable for sustaining much larger life forms, but evolution theory does not have any prediction that life thinks ahead, or even that single-celled life thinks at all. So the existence of much larger life forms (which are also not needed for life to survive) owes its existence to the fact that single-celled life prepared a place that would support larger life, which can be explained easily if the selection of life forms has been at least partly guided by intelligence and cannot be explained at all by evolution theory.