Trust me, you were never 'like me'.
Trusting quantified data under the scrutiny of meticulous trial and error is one thing. But to base an entire philosophy on the mere opinions of the handful of scientists that support creationsism is another thing entirely. You can find these men, just as you have that don't trust their peers, and attack Darwin easily, because of the simple fact that there are a handful. You'll find it difficult to find a similar number of men who are against it. Why? Because it stands up to the scientific method, is rigorously tested, and therefore becomes respected. Whereas those who cannot reconcile their career with their faith, will find it hard to latch onto both reality and superstition. That is the real difference here, data vs. Superstition. I trust not in something you have to simply believe in to be true, but true physical data I can scrutinize under a microscope where I attend school, working on a doctorate. To summarize, I can SEE these results, while your results are either based on comments, opinions, or superstition based belief systems.
To look for the math in a biblical flood, you'll find it anywhere, having created it, from a personal need to. But to reject the entire scientific community as a whole, for the comments of a handful of those who can't put ancient tradition and superstition behind them. The logic of rejecting the data is a refusal of science altogether. Which, is why I feel the need to post a Dawkins quote "Science works, planes fly. Broomsticks and magic carperts do not. If you doubt gravity, jump from a tenth story window". The data is not wrong here. It stand up time and time again. On the other hand, the only data you'll find to the contrary is a paragraph of thoughts. Which, in my opinion is not evidence of anything. You claim that I would not listen to evidence when it is presented, that nothing would change my mind. On the contrary, I would love to be proved wrong, I look for god! I am doing actual research daily because that is the point. We want to find the answer. The difference between us is that you are contempt with the escapism of the superstition, which is to say "the bible tells us". The bible does not however claim to be fact, that was inferred by men. Men who no longer look for answers outside of the bible. Some scientists are in that corner too and you've found them of course, and latched onto this handful, but they are not well respected. So again dear sir, I ask you to bring me some evidence. A singular paper that proves a flood, a young earth. An article that describes god by an author who lived during his lifespan. Bring me Anything at all that would convince me. I unlike all atheists hope to be proved wrong. But you instead tell me, I do not want to listen to reason, while denying me any form of it? This is curious. It tells me there is none. Which I've known for quite some time. I await your response.