[Zeppo]

No apology needed or forthcoming. You have completely misunderstood my comment. You wrote, "In the odd times she actually bothers with details or hard facts, she writes things like 'evolutionists think whales are bears that fell in the ocean'."

You disparage her for supposedly not bothering with details or hard facts, but then you go ahead and give an example which is neither. Rather, the example that you gave is an example of her use of hyperbole. Was that absolutely the only example of "details or hard facts" given in her book? You couldn't find any facts whatsoever in the book? Doubtful. Rather, you chose to answer her hyperbole with some of your own, which is equally silly. So, I stand by my original comment.

[rightinthemiddle]

"What you said." (hurumph!)

[Right Wing Professor]

Was that absolutely the only example of "details or hard facts" given in her book?

It wasn't a fact. It was a stupid lie.

You couldn't find any facts whatsoever in the book?

Oh, so your test for a good book is one in which a few things happen actually to be true?