You gave up? It would be far more precise to state you all have 'given up'. The vast majority of betty boops and AG's arguments, postings, observations, links, what have you, are essentially ignored. You tolerate both of these folks; you certainly don't engage them. Both of them cogently address ID stuff, scientifically. Both of them are given no scientific credibility whatsoever. They are given credit merely for having good manners; but they are simply misguided who need 'to read more' in the insightful words of one of you.
Not ONE person on your side has stated for the record that AG and/or BB has persuaded them that indeed, there is more to it than what Darwinists have provided.
Watching how they are treated by all of you has convinced me of just one thing: you don't really care what either think.
Let's face it: these evo threads are a religious debate in disguise between legalists and grace activists. Darwinism presents a rational way, based on 'laws' in his words, to morally justify living by any code that man decides to invent and codify; whoever is strong enough to impose it wins. There are no morals, just 'logic thru strength'.
Grace activists, otoh, reject out of hand that ANY code is more important than the obedience to Jesus Christ's commands. The biggest crime any creationist could be guilty of here is not lying ... it is telling the truth. It is a very inconvenient truth that the Darwin family inspired the most famous monster story of all time. It is a very inconvenient truth that Annie Darwin's death at a young age affected how Charles delievered 'Origins', and how he felt about God during the time he grieved for his daughter. Folks here don't like talking about inconvenient truths.
I would feel very, very differently about this, if in Public School, I was given the whole picture, and given the option of figuring this out myself. But no. The agenda was king, and inconvenient pieces of information were omitted. PH's link list .... the discussion of Annie Darwin is .... missing.
It is inconvenient to the argument.
As you say, they obviously find agreeable the good postings of AG and BB, but by that very agreement they seem to find no reason to engage on any point they make excepting the agreable tone.
Although I think most of what you have posted on this thread is drivel, my posts to you concerned only Darwin's Daughter and to expose it as the red herring it is. Anything else you bring in is just that also, a red herring.
You may evade reality, but it won't evade you.
I most certainly did engage them. I gave up after posting to them all their scientific errors and realizing they weren't about science but posting their non-science philosophy.