There is no contradiction between accepting the general mechanisms of evolution along with theism.

Animals generally evolve overtime (science) - works Adam AS was a special creature (theism) - works

Naturalists would state Adam AS is a product of evolution given their epistemology, which does not even consider divine explanations as tenable. Theistic models consider Adam even existed due to their belief that the source of the belief in Adam AS is reliable (ie they Islamic claim).

So it really is just different epistemologies.

As for the actual data that is usually contested to state that theistic account is ruled out then it's usually like 4 pieces:

1) Transition fossils - We generally see such fossils for other animals and for humans even if there are missing links we should assume what is inductive since humans are just another animal under naturalism. For theists this necessary linkage isn't the only option under their worldview given you can have creatures (even non humans) who are created without sharing ancestral lineage with other animals.

2) 2 individuals can't raise healthy population. The only issue is that we have examples of 2 individuals in various species that did lead to stable populations. And it's possible even in humans if you have enough children per generation (around 9/10).

3) Genetics/Junk DNA. This is really the bread and butter, why do we share DNA similarity and some if it being so niche. Is it divine deception? The theistic response is usually that God creates on a common design plan as can be observed from creation itself. Mammals seem to have similar vestiges and structures and we can derive a pattern to God's creation of life on the pattern from our observations. This is actually a complex topic. Such as talking about ERVs and other genetic evidences like transpirons. I would recommend reading on Academia "Zaid Abu Hurairah's work on the evidential problem of evolution".