Sorry, but those arguments are all bogus.
They've been addressed and refuted many times by serious scientists.
Many have been presented on these threads, and answered by amatures like myself.
If you wish to report your favorites here, I'll be happy to respond to each.
Let me just remind you now that it's very important not to confuse scientific facts with hypotheses and theories.
There are many confirmed observations (aka "facts") supporting evolution related hypotheses, but confirmation of a hypothesis is required before it can be classified as "theory".
Since some hypotheses related to evolution have been confirmed many times, they are classified as "theories".
But others have not been confirmed and are still considered as just hypotheses.
Examples are origin of life ideas like abiogenesis and panspermia.
fish hawk: "I will go so far as to say that anyone that believes that NOTHING created something and the human eyeball was the work of chance is more than stupid."
Let me explain your problem with some questions:
Question: do you believe in G*d? Answer: of course.
Question: do you believe that G*d created the Universe? Answer: of course.
Question: do you believe that G*d created the Universe with His purposes, design and plan in mind? Answer: of course.
Question: do you believe that what we see in the material world represents the unfolding of G*d's original plan? Answer: of course.
Question: then, if what we see appears to be evolutionary, in what possible sense is that not part of G*d's plan? Answer: in no sense.
So what is your problem with evolution?
My problem with the religion of evolution is: they talk like there is fossil evidence when there isn’t, put down creationists because they have faith ( so that is religion and not science) when evos have absolutely no proof to lay out before us fossil or otherwise but they have faith that someday they will dig it up ( religion not science). The play like the first and second laws of thermodynamics ( and entropy) does not exist. (which of course makes evolution impossible) And Mathematics which tells ;us that if life was by selection and time and chance, it would be a one with enough zeros behind it to fill enough book pages to reach to the moon if stacked up. So how ‘bout YOU entering here your absolute proof of evolution, NOT Micro (changes in a species like dogs and bird beaks) but Macro, dogs to cats, lizards to birds chimps to man.) If you can show us that, you have more proof than the leading Evo scientist alive today. Question: what evidence proves that life evolved from nonliving molecules? Evos answer: Don’t reject a scientific theory just because you have a religious prejudice. This is because they can’t answer the question. try reading Defeating Darwinism by opening minds by Phillip E. Johnson ( yes, Darwin is an ism) Refuting Evolution by Jonathan Sarfati, PHD. The collapse of Evolution by Scott M. Huse. Ready with an Answer by Ankerberg and Weldon ( False assumptions concerning Evolution. Read these and point out to us all the false info in them.