first: evolution makes perfect sense to me. consider the unique adaptations certain species of animals have. the scientific explanation, evolution, is completely reasonable. within a species, there will be certain mutations, or abnormalities in the offspring every so often, which of course we can see in humans (midgets), and other animals (three legged dogs). some will be useful abnormalities, others will not. if the one which is useful helps the animal to survive better than the others, then it will breed more, the others will breed less, and eventually the population will “evolve” into the new breed of the animal, better adapted to its enviroment.
second: while the scientific approach to the origins of the universe, life, and all the other mysteries is certainly not simple, it is far less complicated than explaining everything away with a god. god may seem like a cover-all explanation, but really, it raises important questions of why and how, as well as mysteriously introducing a being that is apparently all-powerful, timeless, omniscient, and existed before “he” created everything. far more complex when you actually look at it. also, with science, the things we conjecture and discover are empirical. we can, in time, do experiments and tests to observe their validity, and decide upon or change our reasons based on the results. things can be effectively “proven” to the extent that it is logically and mathematically incontrivertible, unlike god, which requires a leap of faith alone. even if you say you have “proof” or an experience of god, it is only proof to you, based on your faith. you claiming to have felt god’s presence cannot convince me, and is certainly no proof.
third: imagine if other things were based on faith. the criminal justice system. “well, i have no proof that you killed him, but i have faith that you did, and i feel it in my spirit that you are the one, so therefore, guilty!”
that would obviously be no good.