"Claiming to understand that which is not understandable and ridiculing all who disagree."
Just because you cannot or will not understand, does not make something not understandable.
There is absolutely nothing esoteric about the concept of evolution by natural selection. Some of the specific details of the science which supports it, like the physics behind radiometric dating for instance, may be a bit tough, but the concept is pretty simple, really.
Sheesh, 'natural selection'.
Now there's a tautology for you. What is the most fit? Why that which has survived. In this environment, that one survives, in that environment that one does. Fitness has no real meaning and is cherry-picked as necessary to support whatever point is being proposed.
Whole papers have been written trying to convince the faithful that natural selection isn't a tautology, but in the end it's still "the survival of the survivors".
If you want to believe 'simple concepts' with 'tough' details, be my guest. But you are operating on more faith more than any creationist.
Typically, those who believe the 'scientists' have fallen into the trap that our observable reality can *only* be explained by methodological naturalism (science).
Now that is just fine for exercises like building a national power grid or harnessing the power of the atom, but it fails miserably at explaining unobserved history because it is limited to a single viewpoint, that of methodological naturalism.
Just for fun, let's assume that you are, in fact, observing a supernatural creation. Now, limit your acceptable explanations of this supernatural creation to methodological naturalism (science) and guess how likely are you to arrive at the correct theory? That's right, it's impossible.
The reason it is impossible is because you limited your potential explanations to purely natural models 'a priori'. That is exactly what science does. It is true *by definition*, not as a proof.
Once the scientists get you to accept that initial assumption that only 'scientific' (methodologically natural) explanations are acceptable, you are deceived. It matters not what crazy theories they promote, they are the only game in town as defined by their own rules.
Convenient, eh?
The only key is not to accept the initial assumption. Then you can begin to recognize all of the pure assumptions that underlie these 'theories' and expose them for what they are. Imaginitive wishful thinking.