Why would scientists lie about evolution

I am a scientist and unsurprisingly, I accept evolution to be true as much as I accept gravity to be true.

Reading some questions and answers on this forum about the evolution debate there are many responses by people who say things like:

Evolution is just a theory
Evolution is a lie
Evolution is a religion that requires more faith to believe in than God.
Evolution doesn't hold up to scrutiny when you compare it to ID
If ID can't get taught in science then neither should evolution.

Scientists spend their lives evaluating evidence about the world in their search to understand how the world works. The truth is what is important to science - not opinion or belief and most (nearly all) accept the theory of evolution.

This question is aimed at those that reject evolution but all answers are welcome.

My questions are:

Why do you think evolution is wrong?
What evidence do you have that disproves evolution?
Why would scientists accept evolution if it is a lie when they search for what is true?
Do you think you are more qualified to answer a question on scientific policy or the validity of evolution than scientists in that field?

Thanks

I think that some people are just afraid that when science shows things like that, people will stop believing in a religion, so they say that scientists lie.
I don't see why people would want ID taught in a science class since that isn't science, it's religion. Evolution is science, and has been backed by all evidence thus far.
I personally think that scientists definitely wouldn't lie about evolution. I'm sure scientists tried for the longest time to find evidence against it, but all evidence pointed to evolution. Why make it a scientific theory if it has holes? Scientists do look for the holes and try to fill them, right?

"My question to believers is, where is the proof evolution is real? I know you say you can see species evolve through time or adapt to their environment but would you call adaption evolution?"