What do believers say when you ask or tell them..

[downbeatplumb]

Evolution is interesting, sure. It seems like secular people might sometimes get a kind of Einstein/Darwin tunnel vision. Evolution is not a theory that contradicts faith, unless you decide to have a faith that itslef contradicts evolution. But evolution is not two things. It is not on purpose, in the sense that it is a side effect of time and change, of mutation and survival. In a world with time there needs to be change. If that change can include the genetic structure of things, than there will inevitably be positive and negative growth. Evolution is fantastic, but it is also very limited. Evolution is also not a complete answer. How did we get here? Evolution? Not fully. Evolution, survival of the fittest, random chance, cannot explain many things. The older examples are eyes and flagellan motors, bot apt. But I prefer bigger pieces of the puzzle. How does random natural selection make things that have many interrelated parts that have no overall function until the mechanism is complete? How does nature evolve amino acids and proteins, when you need aa's to make proteins, and proteins to make aa's. How did random chance evolve the genetic structure? When we got a grasp on the coding of life the argument for intelligent design got a lot more plausible. The machine that is DNA/RNA is miraculous in it's construction and function. So I don't disbelieve evolution, but I think it has more to do with beaks of finches in Galapagos than it does the philosophical queries of the origins of life.

Firstly natural selection is not random it is a process of weeding carried out by nature (pradators, environment and food sources),whereby the most 'fitted survive and the least fitted' perish.

Secondly still on about the eye, the eye has a great many fazes of developement, from patches of cells all the way to the full eye read any good book on the subject and you'll see examples.

DNA and RNA is harder to explain but you know what, the chances of it being some god or others artificial construct is so close to zero as to not seriously be considered.

You are arguing a typical god of the gaps assertion here, just coz we dont know does not mean god did it.