Be specific.
You seem to have mistaken me for one who has taken up a position in favor of intelligent design. Actually, all I have done is proposed that the author of the article under discussion be refuted on the basis of his article, rather than the weight of his credentials. If he's really the fool he's made out to be, the peer review process should deal with him quite handily; that's what it's for, after all.
I have also made the observation that it's difficult to design an experiment to investigate the origin of speciation...a contention that I stand by, despite your blithe dismissal. All I meant by it is to point out that the field, being as theoretical as it is, leaves room for a great many academic pi$$ing contests.
I see no need to add another one to the roster, academic or not, so I'll just bow out now, thanks.
Some people think that Evolution is "theoretical".
Others, make sure that they take all the antibiotic, lest they evolve a super bug within their body that will kill them and perhaps many others.
There are people who've died from such things, you know. It's hardly "theoretical" for them.
They're dead.