These questions and objections are touched upon in many parts of the sequences (the series of blog posts which seeded LessWrong, and which were written to address questions like this specifically). In your case, I’d recommend reading almost all of those posts, as they were targeted precisely towards these sorts of objections. That’s a lot of reading, though; if you want specific answers to the questions you posed, then it sounds like you may be interested in the evolution mini sequence (which responds to the claim all we can hope to do is “express evolution’s intelligence”; see also thou art godshatter), and probably also the mysterious answers to mysterious questions sequence (which talks about ways to approach topics that you don’t understand; see The Futility of Emergence in particular), and also maybe the metaethics sequence and the fun theory sequence which give some reasons to expect that “another subset of evolution evolving” is not such a good outcome.
These questions and objections are touched upon in many parts of the sequences (the series of blog posts which seeded LessWrong, and which were written to address questions like this specifically). In your case, I’d recommend reading almost all of those posts, as they were targeted precisely towards these sorts of objections. That’s a lot of reading, though; if you want specific answers to the questions you posed, then it sounds like you may be interested in the evolution mini sequence (which responds to the claim all we can hope to do is “express evolution’s intelligence”; see also thou art godshatter), and probably also the mysterious answers to mysterious questions sequence (which talks about ways to approach topics that you don’t understand; see The Futility of Emergence in particular), and also maybe the metaethics sequence and the fun theory sequence which give some reasons to expect that “another subset of evolution evolving” is not such a good outcome.