Yes. That was your first post---but I think what you are missing is that that has far less to do with your thread title than you might think. At least, most readers will interpret it that way. Perhaps I can help. This was your original thread title:
"What are the evidences against natural selection and random mutations explaining the complexity of life?"
That is a scientific question which is not only worded in a strange way that reflects what no modern day scientist would assert, it sounds very similar to the poorly titled "A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism" petition, which was one of The Discovery Institute's most ridiculous propaganda campaigns. (They make a big deal out of the fact that a bunch of scientists signed their so-called "Dissent from Darwinism" petition, but I don't know of a single evolutionary biologist or paleontologist who would not agree with the two sentences of the petition if not for the way their agreement would be misrepresented to the public. If that sounds surprising, you might want to post it as its own thread topic. EVERY scientist should agree with both of the statements of the petition, despite the disconnect with its title and the unfortunate history of the Discovery Institute.)
Putting all of that aside for the moment, your very first post was this:
That is an entirely different question. Moreover, it refers to a theory which doesn't exist ("the theory of evolutionary creation") and it is basically a theological question (or at least, a philosophical question.)
I would have suggested that your original thread title be reworded and reposted as a scientific topic. It is basically asking about the evidence for the Theory of Evolution. Your first post, however, is---I assume---asking people to explain their theological position, that God used evolutionary processes to creation the living things we observe today. Indeed, I assume that the later question would be focused heavily on how Christians harmonized their evolutionary biology understanding with the scripture evidence, especially from the Book of Genesis.
At the very least, if your interest was in learning more about the evidence for the Theory of Evolution, a science topic, then I would recommend avoiding the theological/philosophical term "evolutionary creationism". (By the way, "evolutionary creation" is a term that I can't even define. The Theory of Evolution has nothing to do with the creation of the matter-energy universe, so "evolutionary creation" sounds like a confusion of the origin of the biosphere and the origin of the universe, even if that wasn't your meaning. That's because the word "creation" has multiple meanings. Some people assume that it refers to the very beginning of the universe, as in the initial moment of the Big Bang. Others will assume that it refers to a theistic view of the universe and/or the Genesis 1 account.)
In any case, Christy explained this (though far more concisely) in the second post of this thread. After that point, there was really nothing more to be said because your next post seemed to ignore her distinction between the theological issue and the scientific issue. In retrospect, I might have recommended that you start a new thread asking if there was any scientific evidence against evolutionary processes and the Theory of Evolution, and yet another thread asking if there was scriptural/theological or philosophical evidence which had troubled those of an evolutionary creationist position (or something similar.)
Of course, it is always easier to avoid confusion after the fact! So I'm not trying to be dismissive or flippant about the issues. Not at all. I'm just explaining why the thread did not proceed in the ways that you were intending. Moreover, many got the impression that yours was a debate challenge rather than a information seeking question. (Obviously, it is easy to misread motives on an Internet forum.)
I think the discussion was also getting more confused when you asserted/asked:
Furthermore, I'm still not sure what you meant when you asked:
Are you asking about scientific evidence against a theological/philosophical position? And are the "top 25" referring to scriptures which you assume stand as evidence against an EC belief or do you mean twenty-five scientific evidences against the Theory of Evolution? You may still feel that our reactions to those questions are "disingenuous"---a word choice sure to cause the discussion to degenerate further---but I can assure you that even now I can't say that I know exactly what you are asking. Also, there is certainly nothing disingenuous about my response to this topic and it would be better to say that you are perhaps surprised or baffled by our responses rather than to attribute motive or a lack of sincerity.
I think you will find most participants here to be eager to help and to explain their beliefs and conclusions. But also keep in mind that many of the questions which get posted on this forum have been asked in some form perhaps a hundred times. So I will be the first to admit that I am more likely to post if a topic is something novel or someone has brought up an interesting angle. On the other hand, if someone has come here to debate or to post some long-ago debunked pseudo-science argument which they copy-and-pasted from some website, you will probably see them ignored or casually dismissed by some. Yes, we are all human and sometimes the initial reaction can be "Not again!" or "I'll let Christy handle that one." (If I were prone to use emoticons, I suppose here is where I should use one to indicate humor.) Anyway, whether it is fair or not, these are some of the likely explanations for why this thread didn't proceed as you had hoped.
Because the initial topic has gotten a bit muddled and people will come and go from these discussions without reading everything which preceded the latest post, you may want to consider starting a new thread for each of the topics which interest you. That may make things easier for everyone. That's just my reaction to the confusion.