Well of course I might be sounding like a creationist website , steve, we all get our info somewhere. And do you know how much like Dawkins you sound !   But be that as it may...or not, it does not constitute a logical argument. In fact the only argument I recall you using which was,nt just assertions and appeal to numbers and suchlike was the geological features of your locale. Credit where it's due !       Oh, and it's encouraging to hear you admit finally , that Darwin got some things wrong.   Of course, he never knew the cell was a complex information bearing thing , and assumed something simple evolving.    He also never knew that the ...imperfections of the geologic record....would not be much better now. What he did know though, and conceded was that the data used in his theory could be otherwise interpreted.   Never mind, shimrod, just say....err..evolution" done it "