His intentions are irrelevant to the validity of his positions. Like I said - why don't you take on his positions rather than attack him personally?
You brought up the subject of intentionality by discussing the definition of "lie" -- a false statement, knowingly made for some purpose.
The statement that evolution is anti-religious is a false statement. If you care to discuss this, kindly answer my questions -- posed several times -- on how evolution's relationship to religion is different from that of other sciences that have findings in conflict with a literal reading of the bible. Why is mathematics not anti-science for differing with the Bible on the value of Pi? Why is physics not anti-science for its estimate of the age of the universe? Why is it not anti-science to say the earth moves?