This means that your "looking deeper" was the indoctrination with the fundamentalist creationist straw men of science. Instead of learning biology, you've been misled with false claims about biology, pretending that it's a religious ideology working with the same type of dogmas and quote mining, what you were already used to.
Only, there's an important distinction: the scientific method is a universal honest endeavor that also must take into account common human fallacies, the vulnerabilities of our own brains. It begins with observation of the natural world, then attempts to understand it, sorting what is human delusion from reality. When it makes conclusions, it's from evidence. Are scientists superior humans or pretending to be? No, it's the process that makes the difference. But there is more objective knowledge. A scientific consensus is stronger than the opinions of individual scientists, for instance. But that's also different from sacred doctrine: scientists who are able to discover actual flaws or new discoveries that advance knowledge and change such consensus, it's the highest reward in science.
Your problem is that you begin and end with the dogmatic and that creationist pseudoscientific arguments have not been able to corrupt the scientific process, or to use the actual scientific process and provide better explanations that fit all of the evidence that existing scientific theories explain. That's also why they don't post their research in reputable scientific peer-reviewed journals. They want to convince you of something, they're not interested in improving the knowledge of reality. That's also why they are lying, trying to promote a false equivalence between opinions and scientific theories. The latter is a strong explanatory model in science, not just an untested hypothesis. Scientific theories rest on many already working hypotheses.
If this comment is perceived as an insult, it's probably a perception issue. Afterall, the manipulation of perception is what the aforementioned straw man deception is meant for. Against this, studying about basic critical thinking skills helps. What was the pseudoscientific creationist deception and why was it misleading? It assumes that some ancient humans of a particular tradition knew more about the world than we eventually achieved using actual research of the world. It assumes that when they wrote those origin myths, they were trying to make scientific statements, but science as we know it did not even exist yet. When you really fall down the trap, you end up embracing falsehoods, pseudohistory, etc. When you meet people outside of the cult, there's high tension, it's called cognitive dissonance. You feel like a crackpot, you perceive that as insulting. This isolation ideology and naivety is easily exploitable. "Don't even bother" is discouragement from learning. Claiming that all other people can do is insults is projected ad hominem attack.
