Regardless what I might believe personally, the evolution and only evolution group on FR appears to be terrified of being questioned and that suggests to me that there is a hole in their theory; perhaps larger than the obvious 'how'd it get started and what allows for the machinery of micro evolution?'.
Your phraseology suggests your position. To say that scientists, who comprise many of the 'group' you refer to here on FR, are 'terrified' of questions belies a misdunderstanding of how science works.
And aren't you overlooking the anti-evolution group that is terrified of the Theory of Evolution and that is hysterical about it because they think it questions, contradicts, and undermines their religious beliefs? Just on this thread a poster likened evolution to an 'out and out' war against a particular religious belief.
"God" is an obvious choice for designer (of the universe) but a god is not necessary to conclude that there is some design in the mechanism of life.
(Of course, they might both be simple accidents based on not simple coincidences, which we are busily speculating over)
In my opinion (not a theory by your definition) there is a mechanism at work.
I would have to stretch well into the realm of faith to accept the random arrival of better, or more successful, or more reasonable looking distinct creatures, all based on a hopeful guess that (again) random chemicals, lying about in luckily well stirred pools of other chemicals, at the right temperature, on a wednesday, were struck by a random lightening bolt and decided to start swimming and breeding...based on Darwin or on anything presented so far to substantiate that claim.
I'm sure I will be shown to be painfully ignorant of current ideology, but I don't think Darwin presumed that his observations were any more reflective of the meaning of life than did monty Python when they offered up their version.
o the extent of the debate I've seen so far, 'evolution' is being used either as a cover story for secular survival or as a knee jerk defense against the questioning of your beliefs.
(I prefer to believe the latter)
Two opposing view points, each with strong support and deep roots, should be allowed to face one another - not be dictated by courts or by a stone wall.