Every single argument the WT uses comes straight from Behe's and Denton's books and by extension the logic used by Paley in the early 1800's. Those people are a laughing stock in the scientific community especially after the Dover trials. Just look at one of the recent Awake's about it - the ONLY argument they bring is the complexity of DNA, a paper Behe wrote in the early 90s which has been thoroughly debunked. The blue book about it is not even being offered in service and there is simply no replacement for it because EVERY single argument can be rebutted by a freshman biology student.
Yes, I was an active, full blazin', climbing the society's ladder Witness when at my job we started doing research into the origins of concepts (how/when/why did we for example develop extensive mathematical and language skills) and the organization of our learning in the evolutionary ladder and that's one of the little things that got me involved in thinking about the validity of the arguments made at the KH.
When you see monkey's doing math in their head with your own eyes, not trained multiplication or addition tables but full-on conceptualized math where you train them the basics of addition with objects and they are able to figure out larger numbers, false statements and substraction without using objects, you've got to start thinking - why would a God that's made us so special give them the same abilities.
Then you can move on to say "God started it" but then you're well beyond the Genesis account and you have officially declared Jesus for the fraud that he wasn't, you can no longer claim to be Christian.
As far as my beliefs go: I don't "believe" or have any "faith" in evolution, I accept evolution as a theory in the proper sense of the word - an imperfect fact. It's not because some parts of Darwin's original theory have been replaced that the concept is no longer valid, it's not because Einstein's theory of gravity was replacing Newton's theory that Newton's concepts became invalid.