http://usabig.com/atnmst/jrnl_ii.php?art=55
Oh, c'mon. You can't be serious!? That's one of the most laughably pathetic screeds I've ever read, and I've read a lot of laughably pathetic screeds.
It's mostly vague (often barely coherent, can't tell what the author is driving at, points left hanging, facts -- or factoids -- introduced with no apparent purpose) rambling (and it's a real challenge to ramble in an article that short) and when not vague it's just wrong.
I don't find a single example in that article of the "serious scientific questions" you assert evolutionists "evade". It lacks the clarity to formulate a remotely clear or specific question. Referring to a vaporous, incompetent, error filled article like that one is in itself an evasion.
You just can't mean that to have been an example of the kind of arguments that you find convincing, or even relevant?! Seriously. Are you having us on? Was that a joke? (I mean an intentional joke?)
“... often barely coherent, can’t tell what the author is driving at, points left hanging ...”
Don’t worry about it. Those for whom the article was written will have no problem understanding it.
Your reaction to it, by the way, is excellent evidence of the kind of “reasoned response” one always gets from evironmental and evolutionary true believers. I’d be alarmed if you had liked it. It’s reassuring that you didn’t.
Hank