The same is true for any literary work, fiction or otherwise, which uses real world references. Remember the original Superman movie? They showed the San Andreas fault in that one...so...it really happened?
Not to mention the fact that no part of the biblical texts invites dismissal on the face of it.
So say you, but like you pointed out to someone else, you have a predisposition to accept, without question, the literal truth of the Bible, the consequences of your failure to do so being...you know.
It stands to reason that an almighty Creator, who takes a keen interest in His creation, would provide a means whereby He could make known His actions and intentions toward the one creature capable of science.
It DOES stand to reason, doesn't it? And I think we both agree that such a Creator, given their ability to, you know, make everything that exists, would be able to prove their existence to everyone on the planet WITHOUT A DOUBT. Arranging the stars to say "God was here", suspending Mount Everest above Tehran, anything like that. The fact that this hasn't happened means either He's not who you think he is, doesn't exist, or has no inclination to make Himself known. But this notion that he held regular conversations with people back in the day, but doesn't do that anymore (except an occassional appearance on tortillas or tree stumps), except of course, "in mysterious ways", isn't plausible to some people. But hey: THAT'S religion, and we're talking about science, right?
Science cannot happen with out language, and language cannot happen without intelligent design.
And the evidence shows that the intelligent critter which invented language evolved from a different critter.
No it is not. Some literary works - Superman being a case in point - mix truth with fiction. In fact, the texts of evolutionism are more akin to Superman novels inasmuch as they propose fanciful renditions of history that has never been observed.
As for the remainder of your remarks, the natural world is simply a manifestation of the handiwork of God, and the biblical texts are His natural means of communicating the same more specifically, and in a manner more plausible than, say, suspending Mt. Everest above Tehran. Science has often observed anomalies. That is all a miracle is: a brief physical anomaly.
The evidence you suggest in favor of intelligent beings having historic derivation from non-intelligent beings is one of those Superman moments. Such fabrications come from people who care not to constrain themselves to what is written in the biblical texts. They certainly do not qualify as science in the strict sense.
As for God speaking directly to people in days past, there is nothing unnatural, superstitious, miraculous, or unscientific about speech, is there?