I agree, this isn't mean to bash religion, I'm just talking about the idea of evolution and the Burden of Proof.
That's my exact issue with the creationist idea, if you accept that a higher being did something that humans can't comprehend, the learning and investigation stops there. You say that we can't understand what put the big bang into motion? No, we just don't yet, but if we as a race don't meet a premature end we will understand eventually.
How can the greatest minds of earth prove or disprove something that likely exists only in the human imagination? Something immaterial can't be proven or disproven.
How do you think it is just as valid of a theory? The other theories have hard proof and evidence, the creationist idea (you can't call it a scientific theory since it's literally magic) is just mashing an obsolete view of the world with new information because you've been told something your entire life and need to adapt.
Saying "X is impossible, therefore God" is the same as "My book fell off the shelf at night with nobody in the house, therefore ghosts" because you can't comprehend what happened, it's just silly. My main issue with it is that it completely halts investigation! When you accept that it's God, ghosts, or magic, you no longer investigate the root cause, you just chalk it up to being incomprehensible and divine. Meanwhile it may have been night-construction at an adjacent/connected building causing vibrations! (Actual scenario I encountered, a CD at a bookstore fell of a wall and the owner chalked it up to ghosts... It was likely due to construction happening at night to the connected building, given the timeframe).
The fact remains: the burden of proof lies on those making claims. You made a claim that a higher power may have set evolution into motion, now you have to prove it. If you can't prove it, then it can be discarded and ignored until you are able to provide proof. It is not my job to try to disprove everything you say, it is your job to PROVE things that you say.