Oops, that's just it right there - evolution DOESN'T have "massive quantities of evidence to support it." Evolutionists take observable data and interpret it a certain way. They then claim that this interpretation is itself evidence for their philosophical intepretation. In other words, it's all circular. There is nothing about the mechanism of genetics, or anything else in science for that matter, which independently confirms evolution. All we see is evolutionists latching onto observable data, applying their own interpretation to it based upon their theory, and then claiming this to be, in and of itself, evidence to support the theory. It's bogus nonsense.
Yes it does. You just hide your eyes and refuse to acknowledge it.
The retroviral segments in ape and human DNA that back up previous morphological studies about how much time has elapsed between the species split, and which species split from which, is as direct evidence as one will find for almost any historical event. Even if you imagine that God created the species, via this DNA record we understand how He did it, and how many millions of years it took, and the process He used is a thing science calls "evolution". It is as simple, and as well understood as any scientific process that one also might call a "miracle of God", like the rain.