Well, I admire your heady response. Let me try and understand it:
You acknowledge the points Havoc made so that makes them invalid? I think that is the standard response to Aquinas.
Or is it that the questions are old and you don't want to respond? Old unanswered objections are just as valid as new unanswered objections.
You do realize, don't you, that most of the objections to evolution are raised by scientists? How many years did self-correcting science take to acknowledge Nebraska Man? Piltdown? Haekel's embryos? Peppered Moths? Evolution of the horse? Maybe science isn't self-correcting untile the principal catches the lies.
Usually, though, it isn't the principal catching them, it is the principal catching hell for them that gets feet moving and retractions made. That and laws on the books in a number of states that require accuracy and integrity in textbooks - causing said lies to disappear lest the community be marred by a public defrocking.. lol
I have no interest in Havoc. No one who posts on these threads is ever convinced by the opposition. I post for lurkers. I think Havoc's post is a classic. It doesn't need a response or commentary. I don't even want to characterize it. Those who read it will know what to think.
Let me excerpt it slightly. I originally argued that in order for Havoc to be correct, all of physics, chemistry, biology and geology would have to be wrong, and havoc would have to be smarter than all the scientists who have lived in the past 200 years.
Havoc's response was basically, no problem. He meets that standard. I don't think lurkers will have any trouble understanding that.