I think he had a hard time with john lennox.
he refuses to debate creation believing scientists, supposedly lest he gives them credibility. I suppose it never occurs to him, that if the creation position is so unscientific he could demonstrate that once and for all. or maybe he only takes on non science trained creationists because he knows he wont do so well with an equally matched creationist.
re steve,- even as a layman, I can see that making interpretations of the past is far from the observable, testable, repeatable science of the present. the latter produces the technology and inventions we benefit from , the former produces nothing of the sort, and I don't know of anything of practical use that needed evolutionism for its invention.