>> Please note that while claiming to be “scientific,” every piece of evidence found is not treated as a possible refutation of evolution, but often as a heroic struggle to fit that evidence into the evolutionary framework. <<
Name one.
I can show where science has used its process to refute attempted fakes.
That sidesteps the true issue. Can you show where science has attempted to refute evolution, itself?
Evolution, insofar as the kind that would confute intelligent design, has never been demonstrated in an experimental environment.
But as for your question, here's one: why would Prigogine get a Nobel prize for his theories regarding self-organizing systems if there were not a prior philosophic commitment to finding a materialistic cause?
Furthermore, the invariable answer to the insolubles (my personal favorites are irreducible complexity and instinctive behavior) of evolutionary theory are ALWAYS a) you're religious, so you don't care about facts, b) we haven't figured that out yet, or c) offer up a scientific gnat as the basis for swallowing the theoretical camel.