its more complicated than that and dismiss questions as assertions from unreasonable fundamentalists.
This seems an *extremely* unfair characterization from you, given that you just asked a question and got a perfectly valid and informative response, without any hint of "it's more complicated than that" or dismissal of your question.
Perhaps you owe someone an apology.
I have to say my faith in evolution is declining with the noxious treatment of ID proponents.
Oh, stop the drama-queening. Anyone who has watched this debate for any length of time knows that the "ID proponents" are far more obnoxious in their attempts at "discussion" than the evolution proponents, and are more apt to be the first ones to throw mud. And if you had been involved in this for decades, as many of us have, you'd understand why the evolution proponents might be a bit testy -- it has to do with the failure of the creationists to discuss things in good faith. They rely on dishonest tactics and refusal to admit error, and keep coming back with the same debunked arguments year after year.
If the "ID proponents" had been dismissed and ridiculed right off the bat, that would be one thing, but what you're overlooking is that there's a long history involved here, and the "ID proponents" are now being treated the way they are due to what they've earned.
I have followed this for some time and disagree with your sense of it.
I think some in the evolution community are definitely over reaction. The discussion is conducted as if it is 1925. It clearly is not. This is not Scopes. This is a question of whether ID will even be heard in science classrooms not the censorship of evolution. In my extensive review of this debate, it is the evolutionists who take the Oscar. They suggest that science is about to end.
And yes, in this thread you will find over dramatic reactions to my questions in comments. Evolution could be wrong-- even though I do believe as I stated earlier that the evidence is much stronger for evolution than any other rival theory.