and so the general impression i'm getting is that a best evidence for evolutionism is not forthcoming but comprises the vast learning of multiple disciplines which i should go study despite at least some evolutionists themselves admitting the glaring deficiencies of the theory!?

penny-though i do think darwinism has contrbuted to moral lapse and mass murder i am not personally persueing that line except in response to those who equate biblical christian faith with evil actions.that some christians do evil sometimes is undeniable ;and they are then inconsistent with their faith.if some one like stalin compares butchering thousands to cutting the grass it is hard to see how they are being inconsistent with their evolutionary ,survival of the fittest beliefs.however i do accept your modern history argument as a contributory factor of the extent of the atrocities.
i confess that i do lump all the strands into darwinism but i'm not convinced that i need to differenciate to make a point.but since you mention it;i dont think i've said much about gould and eldridge making the lack of transitional fossils into evidence of their own theory of punctuated equilibria!.they initially rejecting neo-darwism in the 70/80s apparently are more careful what they say now since creationists quoted them ,and include gradualism as a mechanism for evolutionism.hope thats accurate enough for the pedantic!

bill-creationists are not in dispute about natural selection on the galapogos or anywhere else darwin went.how does that prove mud to man evolution?.BTW have you come across the [admittedly creation perpective]film"the voyage that shook the world" which films on location places on the beagle voyage.
best as ever   pete.