Okay, since you're so enlightened, explain to me how you think evolution by natural selection works. I'm willing to bet $1000 that you won't get it right without looking it up.
You're ignorant, and you attempt to hide it by saying that no one understands your beliefs. The reality is that we all understand your beliefs. We all also understand how blatantly incorrect you are. There is no alternative theory to the diversification of life than evolution, and even if evolution by natural selection was proven false, that doesn't say anything about creationism. Your logic is assuming that if evolution = false, then creationism = true. Go take a logic class, because there is no evidence in support of your outlandish and radical religious beliefs, when there are literally mountains of it behind evolution.
Get out, you have no place in modern society.
Way to assume my position into a straw man you can easily knock down!
3/4ths of the statements in that paragraph are simply irrational assumptions, obviously made to be easy to refute, so you can feel better about yourself. Nice work.
Any real Christian uses science, and believes in natural selection. While we believe in microevolution by natural selection (which is observed), we do not believe in unobserved macroevolution which true, observational science can't prove whatsoever. You can't say (as all evolutionists do, without reason) that because microevolution is true, macroevolution must also be true. Just because a dog can change into another kind of dog, doesn't mean that dog could change into an entirely different species later on. There is no current or fossil evidence ANYWHERE that supports macroevolutionist beliefs. All "supposed" evidence has been revealed to be falsified, or simply a hoax. Archeopteryx? Falsified. Even current evolutionists claim that Archeopteryx doesn't support the theory. Go ahead, throw your sources at me. In fact, give them to Dr. Kent Hovind, who has had a cash reward of $50,000 up for decades, for one single piece of true evidence support evolution. No one has taken the money.
Frankly, it takes much more faith to believe in a hypothesis (or, more truthfully, pure conjecture) which has no proof whatsoever, than to believe in the Bible. So what if your evolution is backed by the majority of so-called "scientists"? The consensus of scientists in history has notoriously turned out to be false most of the time, whether it be behavioral physics as put forth by Aristotle, geocentrism (which was never backed by Protestantism, by the way), or continental drift being REJECTED by the majority of scientists.
The obvious alternative theory to evolution is supernatural Creation. Of course it isn't backed by "modern" science. Guess what, the atheistic scientists who created "modern" science gave it a definition excluding any phenomenon such as Creation. I wonder why that is? It becomes even funnier when true science was founded in Christendom, carried on for 300 years by great scientists such as Newton, Kepler, and many, many others.
Obviously, none of your raging arguments hold water. I have a great place in modern society, and right now that appears to be here, refuting you soundly.
