ID vs Darwin vs Quarks

I have been puzzled by the Intelligence Design debate, even puzzled by how folks apply Darwinism to but half the equation, yet leave the other half not dealt with. The undealt with? The evolution of elemental particles? How did quarks and leptons evolve? Where did fundamental particles and forces come from? Did the natural laws governing them evolve before them, or evolve after them. Or are we to ‘begin’ with the assumption that gravity and such forces were part of the forever stew that was forever brewing? Okay, you get the drift. We at the monastery are forever debating over the dining table, it is these elemental matters that we debate. Yet in public debate and scientific journals, we read only about the debate ‘after the fact’ … it seems to me that this arguing of matters of life and evolution of organic entities is somewhat like building an automobile, beautiful body and with the latest paint job, yet under the hood is … nothing. The engine isn't there. So too Darwinism, a lovely theory, many parts proven, yet under the hood, all elemental matters and natural laws that precede life as we know it are ignored. I guess they are simply assumed …