You're really not aware of what a "niche" is, are you?

So whose behind the intelligence in the intelligent design?

I reject intelligent design. I was just laying out the differences in the hypotheses.

@IvanKaramazov: Yes indeed. So-called 'intelligent design' is merely creationism... so, no intelligence involved

Again, I have seen some talk about natural selection - up to a point. That point again being humans. It's better than the picture you paint, but still flawed. Unfortunately, a lot of left-leaning people take an equally special creationist view of homo sapiens, insisting either that races don't exist or adaptationism is false or cultural evolution nullifies genetics. I don't see a lot of good ideological alternatives on offer, even among biologists themselves.

Well, there's no genetic basis for the concept of race. Any randomly assembled group of members of a race will have as much inter-group genetic variation than any similar-size group of humans gathered from all over the world... and just as many identical alleles.
There's only one race... the human race.
It seems to me that what is commonly attributed to 'race' is in fact culture. We see enormous differences in behaviours, attitudes, beliefs, styles, etc between one group and another group, and attribute those differences to skin colour, eye shape, etc. In such cases, we're merely making simplistic associations between what people do and how people look. From there, confirmation bias is away and running.

If we control for cultural factors, the behaviours and attitudes of all humans suddenly become homogeneous.

My point in a nutshell. The denial of heritably clustered alleles in favor of asserting 19th Century ideas only to deny them is just empty. The fact that the ceiling and floor in variation for an African is roughly the same as the ceiling or floor for a European doesn't mean the means are the same, and denying that is obtuse.