What garners my impatience is the lack of wonder at life itself.
What garners my contempt is the rhetoric of dogma--"anti-evolutionist", indeed. Sounds like "anti-Christ" and raises my suspicions that they are trying to sell a franchise, not increase the realm of knowledge. The theory of evolution is an invaluable, even indispensible, paradigm for categorizing life and studying life. The fossil and genetic evidence is fascinating (though they seem impervious to the glory of it), but they reason from now to the past, then try to reason from the past until now. It just ain't necessarily so--and tell them that, and watch them fly into a rage.
For instance, the anthropologist reasoned that the jaw changed because of soft food. It could very well have been that cooking was developed to allow for the changing jawline.
If we ever can explain the Why and How of it--I doubt it'll be the biologist who does it. He reasons the cart before the horse and thinks so small--I think it'll be the physicist, if anybody can.
Yes, they can take a frog apart and count all the little pieces. When they can put it back together again, they can call me.