Y'all noticed this, but you, PH have got their number.
Apparently you take issue with my question about wherther this experiment is more supportive of intelligent design theory thatn evolutionary theory. But you don't seem to address the question, just take issue with it. So, if you take issue with the idea of it being more supportive of intelligent design than evolution, I have to assume you believe it to either be more supportive of evolution or equally supportive of both or irrelevant to either one. Or you think it actually proves one of those positions (which neither the authors nor I seem to think)
Could you say which is your position and why?