Here's why Creatards might be right

[TheRocketSurgeon]

i understand that some people have the opinion that evolution is completely random and not intelligently designed  i just dont have that opinion . there is no proof its simply a theory noone really knows for sure or were there to document the evolution or perform testing during the process so its a theory . i do understand the theory of evolution that some people think had nothing to do with intelligent direction/design .

No. No no no.

We've been over this. Theory does not mean "guess" or "opinion", in science. People in the ID camp want to dilute the meaning of theory, at least in the public mind, because they know their idea does not measure up as a scientific theory. You have fallen for this propaganda.

You are not entitled to hold an opinion on a scientific theory until you really understand it. I'll apply the same basic test I apply to everyone who tries to have an evolution discussion with me. Name the basic equation that proves a genetically-reproducing population will not remain stable. It's covered on week one of any course on genetics, which is of course one of the first (and primary!) things one must understand before even beginning to understand evolutionary biology under the Modern Synthesis.

It's not "some people" who "have the opinion that evolution is completely random and not intelligently designed", it's literally 99.9999999% of the field of professional biologists. I have yet, in my professional career and my friendships/associations with other scientists outside of work, to meet a biologist who does not laugh when you propose the idea of an intelligent designer. [Edit to Add: And yes, that includes the Christian ones.]

A few guys have made quite a lot of money off the credulous, who want desperately to believe in an Intelligent Designer. There's a lot of money to be made, there. But the guys who have made such claims can not support their claims, under investigation. That is what it takes to have an idea in the scientific community. What they have doesn't even qualify for the term "hypothesis", because it is an argument from ignorance and by definition cannot be falsified. What few claims they have made in the physical world are quickly proved to be false, and based upon poor assumptions. "There can't be Thing A by natural selection!!" "Here it is, I proved how Thing A evolved." "Oh... well, uh, you can't show how Thing B evolved!!" "Oh, the team over at UT-Austin already proved that one." "Oh... well, uh, what about thing C!?" 

It's not an argument. It's not the other side of the opinion. It's a few naysayers against HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of scientists who all agree about evolution. Numbers by themselves don't mean anything, of course, but when every expert in the field says the same thing but you prefer to listen to a tiny fraction of a percent who have a clear agenda for what they say, and have been called out repeatedly in public court hearings for that agenda, because they expressed it openly, you have passed beyond the realm of "my opinion is worthy of being respected".

Your opinion must be based on the best facts available, or it is worthless. This is true of anyone. And ID is simply not based on anything factual or worthwhile... it's quite literally "I don't understand how this works, so it can't be natural".