Absolutely, bilge. The story is just so. There was more evidence for the Mesonychus, Worms, and Lynx and you know where they went.
The challenge of the argumentum ad Behe is that there's supposedly no way an IC thing (which turns out to have lots of non-essential parts) could have evolved at all. But, when it becomes obvious that the thing at least could have evolved, the next ditch ("Where's the evidence for that?") is always retreated to without acknowledgement.
I forget what you think you did on worms. Lynx, I remember. You attempted to demonstrate, or attempted to appear to demonstrate, that nothing Malthusian is going on when lynxes and hares overpopulate and crash in staggered cycles. As someone once told you, you don't score nearly the points you think with your style of argument. Why do you assume no one but you can see through essentially transparent attempts at razzle-dazzle?