I will not have a protracted discussion about this thread; I have already said my bit. However, I will be a little obtuse and disagree with your following comment.
Mathematics, in any form, is a type of language and where did language come from? Of course you say "it evolved" and yet you have not explained to me (as I have asked elsewhere) how so many languages came into existence without a common root. The explanation is that God gave man language as part of man's creation. Adam and Eve did not have to learn language before they could communicate. Language was already built in and only when man and woman gave birth to the next generation did language have to be learned as part of the growing and learning process. We then come to the Tower of Babel (as it is called) and then God confused the languages by giving people new languages, just like the Disciples were given the Holy Spirit and they could suddenly communicate in different languages. Science is unable to explain this.
It is interesting that the same astrology and the astronomical names and the names of pagan gods etc. travelled with the people into the different cultures that were established as the people were driven into separate groups, because of the different languages forced upon them. The one common factor is; they all came out of Babylon. This shows us that something unusual happened, which again, science cannot answer and yet we have the answer in the Bible.
Should I base my understanding on something that gives me the answer, or should I base my understanding on something that cannot give me the answer I need?
As useful as science has been in finding out the way things work and given us technology, it has not changed mankind for the better. Morals have not improved and are just as bad in some cases as they were pre the Great Flood. Some will have benefited from science, but it is the majority that counts and man, who is now is seemingly in control of his destiny and evolution, has done nothing to improve on that which was designed from the beginning. All man is doing is putting a surgical plaster on injuries caused to himself.
Morals are built into God's instructions, given to man. Man did not learn and exercise acceptable morals to God pre the Flood. If according to your theory, morals should be innate in man and the the Golden Rule was not exercised, the morals that man displayed were not acceptable to God. After the law was given at Sinai, those like King David, for all his faults, could say; "the law of God is perfect". Consider the 10 commandments; what is not perfect in the 10 commandments or the keeping of them? We know that the last commandment of the ten can, at first reading, sound sexist, but given that can easily be seen to apply to both sexes, there really is no problem. So what is wrong with the 10 commandments, which apply to both men and women, if everyone kept to them? Society would be far better off if everyone kept the 10 commandments.
All the best