“In fact, if evolution were true, there wouldn’t be any rational reason to believe it!”
Bet you couldn’t define evolution if your life depended on it.
“If life is the result of evolution, then it means that an evolutionist’s brain is simply the outworking of millions of years of random-chance processes.”
Nope. An ‘unguided’ process, but not random.
"The brain would simply be a collection of chemical reactions that have been preserved because they had some sort of survival value in the past.”
SOME SORT of survival value? Like, say, using rational thought?
"If evolution were true, then all the evolutionist’s thoughts are merely the necessary result of chemistry acting over time.”
You say ‘merely’ to dismiss the process that builds skyscrapers taller than the Tower of Babel.
And got us to a moon that the Bible says rolls around inside the sky.
"Therefore, an evolutionist must think and say that “evolution is true” not for rational reasons, but as a necessary consequence of blind chemistry.”
Show your work. Sounds like you’re just dismissing reality as a lesser option.