no, shimrod, I did not think you would read sarfati,s book, even if it were on the shelves of high st shops. I also am not surprised that you did not present any reasoned argument either....cant remember the last time you did, on the subject....just the usual dismissive mocking. you did not even say what dawkins arguments are , because as you more or less admit ,you expect there to be answers to his supposed evidences.

bill...if we are the product of intelligent design we certainly can expect that we can trust our assessments of what is reasoned, and make informed judgments on such. if we are only the result of accidental biological, chemical processes ,there is no reason to be sure ,even given, learning to evaluate study, that we are correct. that is not to say that I think you are unable to evaluate arguments, as I don't believe we are accidents.
I do however believe our presuppositions will colour our assessments of available evidence, and that includes you, bill.
so ,although I am accused of cherry picking the evidence, it is specifics I go for, since if I can demonstrate the big and small holes in the evolutionary assertions , it is evident that it is not the fully evidenced theory it is fobbed off to be.
the usual response to such reasoning ,is to say the bible account cannot be proved either, usually with the tactic of mockery.
I agree, that dismantling the Darwin edifice does not prove the bible, but IMO the evidence is consistent with a designer and creator.