Yes. Extensively. Many, many, many hours.
You'll excuse me if I find that exceedingly doubtful, especially given that you're repeating the same line about lies being taught in the science classroom that a lot of right-wing theists claim in this country. Oh, I don't doubt that you've attempted that sort of self-reflection. I just doubt that you've come anywhere near as close to achieving it as you clearly think you have. What I think you've actually done is ask God, in the silence of your own mind, to reassure you that your beliefs are accurate - which is no different than self-reassurance, under the circumstances.
So instead of just telling me that you've done it extensively, for many, many, many hours, how about you give some details on just what it is that you've done?
Yes, I have. I have three children so I have had numerous high school and college biology texts come into my home that I have examined. Suffice it to say, there were numerous inaccuracies and, in some cases, blatant lies regarding the theory of evolution.
How closely have you examined them? What 'inaccuracies' and 'lies' are you referring to? In case you haven't figured it out, I don't trust your judgment when it comes to evolution, not the least reason of which because I doubt you've ever taken the time to actually learn what evolution is really about (as opposed to what places like the Discovery Institute say it's about). People who are not knowledgeable about a subject are prone to assuming they know it better than they actually do, and to paraphrase something I read recently, once you start making assumptions based on incomplete information, those initial assumptions tend to stay there and shape any further information you take in, directing you further and further away from accurate conclusions.
So I want to know specifics, instead of just generalities. Don't just tell me that you've spent many hours trying to set aside your Biblical beliefs, don't just tell me that you've found numerous inaccuracies and blatant lies regarding evolution. Give me details on things like this.
There is simply no reason to fully dismiss the possibility of a Creator.
And when did I say that you, or anyone, should fully dismiss the possibility of a creator? What I said is that some evidence, which evolution has, far outweighs no evidence, which is what intelligent design/creationism has so far. That doesn't mean "there's no creator-god", that means there's no evidence, and without evidence, your chances of convincing someone who doesn't already believe in your god are practically nil.
Don't you get it? If there were real, solid evidence supporting the idea of intelligent design in Earth's past, then evolutionary theory would already incorporate it, the way it incorporates artificial selection and genetic engineering. The problem is, there is no such evidence. That's why creationists have to resort to referring to creationism with euphemisms like intelligent design, and are now referring to "teaching the controversy" (which you alluded to with "alternate theories"). What creationists mean by both is an attempt to get their foot in the door - to say, essentially, that their beliefs haven't been disproved and should be taught too. However, while your beliefs haven't been disproved, that is a very long way from saying that they have any supporting evidence whatsoever, and science requires evidence (and lots of it) before something is accepted as being true.
If you have truly studied and researched Intelligent Design Theory and have still come to the conclusion that there is no possibility for a Creator then you have reached a personal decision that everyone is entitled to. If the ToE is so convincing, then I fail to see why people get all torqued up when an alternate view is presented. In other words, why should ToE advocates have anything to be worried or concerned about?
Because when you start talking about "alternate views", you prove that you don't really understand how science works to begin with. Science isn't something where a person can read up on it and decide what they want to believe in, just as you can't decide whether to believe in gravity or not. It's a way to figure out how reality works, and reality doesn't care what an individual wants to believe, or what several billion people want to believe for that matter.
So, in one respect, it doesn't matter whether people like you want to believe in evolution or not. But in other respects, it matters very much. Take the example of deciding not to believe in gravity that I just listed. Do you really think I want to see people walking off of cliffs or tall buildings because they'd convinced themselves that they could ignore gravity? Or that I'd want to see people drinking poison because they'd been talked into believing that God would protect them from its effects? Or that I'd want to see people dying from easily-preventable diseases because of hype about immunizations causing autism, despite there being no credible link between the two?
So there's your answer. That's why I get all torqued up, as you put it. The consequences of fooling people into thinking they can decide for themselves whether evolution is real may be less dire than those other things I mentioned, but they're basically the same thing - the idea that what a person believes overrides reality, even though this is most certainly not true. Belief doesn't protect you from dying due to a fall, or from dying if you drink poison, or getting sick/dying from a disease, so it's foolishness to think that it can determine how reality works.