You are right, evolutionism does not deny a creator, but evolutionists do. An overwhelming majority of evolutionists are also atheists, and the two beliefs are as inextricably linked as PETA and vegetarianism, (theistic evolution is a pathetic joke from a Christian perspective and is perpetuated by people who don't understand true faith.) Also, my reason for mentioning my opinion of atheism was because a previous poster had already brought up the issue of evolutionism and atheism ("Evolution is one of the biggest lies ever made. It's main goal, is that people stop believing in God...") When you say "unsubstantiated assertions" you assume I must use science to provide proof for my assertion, but I was merely explaining the reasoning behind my opinion (yes, opinion. I don't claim to have ALL the facts.) I generally don't care if anyone is actually swayed by my statements (I was venting.) As for the counter-example, it proposes a process involving the eye actually gaining new abilities and not just adapting (A nearsighted, colorblind, creature with no depth perception will either survive, genes unchanging, or it will die, genes still unchanging. It will never need new abilities.) It is in no way a counter-example to my statements. Biased, pseudo-scientific speculation will always be defeated by cold reasoning and spiritual truth.

"when presented with an apple, one may look at it and conclude that is indeed an apple, or he may spend years trying to come up with a theory that will prove it is actually an expertly crafted fraud. I think it is probably just an apple"