You have been asked to read the Malthusian Respectability and Marriage chapter (18) of Desmond and Moore and have shown no sign of having done so. You are refusing to address the question of how mind derives from matter.
Ive read it a number of times before your stupid question. If I can remind you, you wanted me to read D&M and discuss some point. I was out in the field and I stated CLEARLY that I didn't have the book at hnd. When I arrived home several days later. IASKED YOU what was your question. Then you posed some STUPID ASS question about Greta van Sustern. If that was supposed to be something worth my time then I shall send you an invoice. My time is worth moe than your beer soaked questions regarding lingerie, GLBT issues, and how fainthearted women are.
I refuse to acknowledge such Idiocy.
If a question is worthy of consideration Ill try it out. If I make a decision that questions are ROT, Ill ignore them as I see fit.
As far as the rest of it, Isnt Michael Denton a "fellow" at the iscovery Institute?? You seem to miss the big pictures in your own quote mining. efforts
Your DM Chapt 29 fails to show that the subsequent pages discuss the growing expertise of Huxley in comparison to the "old church guards" at the Universities who claim to be "naturalists' and , like OWen, are just shills for the church.
I don't focus on the ICR and the DI, they have, by virtues of guys like gunga and Herald, focused ON SCIENCE and are , by their own charter, attempting to water down science taching in schools ( A subject that you always conveniently ignore)
Islam's attitude to evolution theory is a more difficult target.
No it isn't, Orthodoxy , be it Islamic, Judaic, or Christian is all based upon Fundamentalism. PERIOD, No difficulty at all. Main line Islam is like Notre Dame , they accept and embrace Organic Evolution(with or without theistic "coaching")
Your "flagella" reference is being made without any understanding of the use it was presented in Dover. IT WAS FIRST EMPLOYED BY AN IDER. It was soundly debunked as a "fully formed" mechanism by Ken Miller. You've failed to bring that up.
You continue with the long masses of writing and Im waiting for the day that you finally understand something of what you speak.