Nice cliche for a dodge. How many times have you sued that not so clever line. Guess you have no answer or explanation why dating is so subjective so back to the old smoke and mirrors.
As you asked regarding the quote from Darwin, he said expressing his doubts of darwinism: "With me," he said, "the horrid doubt always arises whether teh onvictions of man's mind, which has been developed from the mind of lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?" This is found in Darwins own pen, in a letter to William Graham, Down, July 3, 1881, in The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin Including an Autobiographical Chapter, ed. Francis Darwin (London, John Murray, Albermarle Street, 1887),1:315-316. It is widely quoted by Darwinists and Theists alike in serious discussions of this kind of debate. Alvin Plantinga has written extensively on the subject. I can give you other references which site the quote, but I see no need in it.
The rhetorical device which you employ is a common stylistic method for evasion of addressing the content of the question. It is mostly evasive prose. Deriding the theist by involking the 'heroic age of science' maneuver. The device, rhetorically speaking, is to make the skeptic reader or debater feel if you do not 'believe' the oppositions appeal to scientific 'advancement' you have been left behind the scientific magesteriums pronouncements and are illiterate and uninformed. To be dismissive in the face of legitimate epistemological questions is a form of a self-imposed defeater of your position. Most serious-minded people who choose to engage in making their arguement are simply expressing what they believe are logical incoherencies in the Darwinists worldview.
I am willing to learn from you and am willing to teach you. But people who talk past the other offer no good will to learn and are stuck in their untenable position from which their logic and reason cannot extricate them from their selfimposed ignorance on the subject. That, by the way, is a two-way street. It is not just the Darwinists but also the theist who limits himself with presuppositional hinderences.
Thank you for your correspondence.