That's simply hilarious. I've witnessed debates including the major proponents of Darwinism and Intelligent design, and the ID folks (and especially Behe) raised points that the Darwinists were so utterly incapable of rebutting that they instead took your strategy and simply ridiculed what they did not understand (or, as likely, understood but could not rebut).
If you want to debate specifics of irreducible complexity or the chromosomal barrier, I'll be more than happy to disabuse you of your errant philosophy. I suspect that you are utterly unqualified to debate any of these points, but your uninformed dismissal of ID is duly noted.
Odd that given the opportunity to debate under oath in an international news forum, the ID advocates chickened out. I suppose that when there is a penalty for lying, ID doesn't debaste so effectively.
Behe has been rebutted in detail. The fact that you may have been holding your fingers in your ears and singing, "nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, I can't hear you," at the time doesn't change that.
There have been a few threads on this subject in the three years since you last posted - perhaps you would like to review them before continuing, lest you find yourself falling into old traps.