[Dimensio]

That you two have found a nit to pick and appear to be liking it may be evidence of a shared common descent with chimps.

When did I say that your inaccurate commentary on the article was evidence for evolution?

It looks more to me that, rather than admit that you misspoke and demonstrated a poor understanding of the article, you're trying to shift attention to attack a point that I never made. Once again a creationist refuses to admit an error, even an extremely simple one.

How about this: He hits the nail on the head, however, about a general, and undeniable, assault on religion, of which religious people see evolution as part.

That's a better phrasing. Unlike your original posting, you don't imply with it that the article cited evolution as something seen as an attack in religion.

[Tribune7]

That you two have found a nit to pick and appear to be liking it may be evidence of a shared common descent with chimps. . . When did I say that your inaccurate commentary on the article was evidence for evolution?

LOL. What we have here is a problem with fundamentalist literalist missing a metaphor.