Many scientists are dismayed that evolution is still considered even controversial. I agree. We don't know everything about the mechanics of evolution, but it is clear that it occurs. Most importantly, I don't think this presents a problem at all for there having been a creator. The creator god that I imagine is not some Zeus who is ready at any moment to unleash chaos upon the world. My creator is someone who has, as a prerequisite to achieving perfection, not only completely come to understand natural law, but has agreed to be bound by it.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that each person who is born on earth lived as a spirit with a unique individuality in a premortal existence with our heavenly parents. What did we do there? We don't remember, nor has much been revealed. But allow me to reasonably speculate.
As we prepared to come to this earth, we learned not only something of what it would be like to live here, but also how the earth would be created and how our mortal bodies would be created, eventually to house our spirits. Those of us who were interested went to "school" to learn the science of it all. I imagined that we learned geology, astronomy, biology, and botany. And I imagine that we learned how physical beings evolve from one state to another. I imagine that we learned that, with God's help, and with the help of the Atonement of his son, Jesus Christ, the process of our evolution could be sped up dramatically.
Why does religion have to remain in the realm of the mystical and miraculous? It doesn't. As more and more truth comes to be known, religion should become less mystical and miraculous, until, some day, we know all things, and to us it will be completely un-mystical and un-miraculous.
As Kenneth Miller puts it in Finding Darwin's God:
We have been freed to understand the change of seasons not as divine whim, but as a consequence of the tilt of the earth's axis in relation to its orbit around the sun. We watch the movement of the tides under the calculable power of gravity, produce new substances by rearranging the atoms of raw materials, and exploit the energy of elementary particles to power our homes and send messages through space. We have learned enough of the natural world to understand that it operates according to the physical principles [of] science.
Finding Darwin's God, page 168
What's so hard, then, about believing that life itself "operates according to" the same principles? It involves, I think, the fear that, if we let go and recognize science for what it is, that it will somehow demolish God or take away our need for belief in him.
I think that is preposterous. Such short-sighted beliefs give religion a bad name.
As Miller writes:
I find it puzzling and disappointing that so many would have pinned their religions hopes on the inability of science to explain the natural world. In fact...an accurate and complete understanding of the world, even in purely material terms, should deepen and strengthen the faith of any religious person.
Finding Darwin's God, page 169