I never claimed to have an advanced scientific understanding of natural selection down to individual genetic changes on the molecular level, but, as Lazarus explained to you before, I am aware of it and know that better thinkers than I accept this as the reality, based on observations of the universe, both inside and outside the laboratory. Whereas nobody accepts creationism as a reality based on actual observations of the universe, they accept creationism inherently and then try (usually very comically) to fit the observations to their preconceived notions. To use an extreme example: If carbon dating the dinosaur bones shows them to be several million years old, this was either a trick by God (to test our faith) or Satan (to fool us out of our faith). Obviously this is a wildly speculative conclusion that's not actually supported by the evidence. That dinosaurs roamed the earth for millions of years, on the other hand, fits with all the data.
Seriously, if you think a divine hand is necessary to explain how complexity in the natural world came to be, then I do regard your viewpoint as quaint, like someone who thinks a million tiny angels angels hold him down to the earth and keep him from floating into space. It happens by itself. No divine or otherworldly hands are necessary. Every physicist knows this (see what I did there?).
Whether or not I can list you the entire chains of A-T and G-C bonds involved in sprouting the first proto-eye or proto-wing is irrelevant to my argument. And I couldn't care less if you like me or not. I find you arrogant and self-important, not to mention a very sad and angry person. I'm glad I don't have to live inside your head.