Quote:

So now I'm not only "narrow minded" I'm also a moron.

I said your statement was moronic, not you. There is a big difference.

Quote:

If you define a scientist as a person who adheres to the scientific method, I think it's safe to state that "[a]ll scientists accept evolution" as a reasonable way to understand life.

Your statement compares the acceptance of the theory of evolution with the acceptance of the scientific method, by any basis of logic that comparison is wrong. It also goes on to say that all scientists accept this thinking which propels your statement into the realm of ridiculous.

At that point I had to assume that noone in their right mind would make this comparison so I concluded that your understanding of the scientific method must be warped.

The fact that scientist use the scientific method to prove evolution(or study evolution) is undisputed, and no scientist would argue with that. However using the scientific method to study a subject does not make the proof of that subject suddenly legitimate. We can use the scientific method to prove the existence of the loch ness monster, but the scientific method in itself does not prove anything, it just provides the superior method to approach the investigation.