Steve, you keep saying that challenges to the Theory of Evolution are holding back progress. What progress do you mean?

"Keep saying it"? I don't recall having said this at all! I love challenges to the theory of evolution as it happens. But those challenges need to be based on evidence before I'll listen. Not based on the insertion of a fellow for whom there is no evidence and who needs infinitely more explaining than the stuff he's supposed to explain. Simple!

Earlier we seemed to be in agreement that Darwinism should not be misapplied to social affairs. Why not? If it's good for nature, why isn't it good for man? Methodological naturalism as social "science," why not? What's the ethical quandary there? Is there one? Whether Darwin intended it is irrelevant.

Darwin was a scientist who confined the conclusions of his research to the natural world. You have no right to extrapolate beyond his expressed intentions. That's what the Nazis did, remember? Do you for a single second think that Darwin would have shackled himself to the Nazi cause? By saying "if it's good for nature, why isn't it good for man?" you are displaying, I'm sorry to say, pig ignorance of what evolution by natural selection is. Go thou and read Darwin's fabulous book. Take your time.