Here's another ID blog, sort of, they seem a little uncertain of themselves and unaware of how weak their opponents are. I've been amusing myself in the comments section. (Here and here...if I could sharpen my rhetoric and barbs more, I would. It's a goal. I look at it this way, if you have to eat your words then they'll be especially bitter. One may as well make use of language to learn, since that's what one of its main purposes seems to be.)
Maybe I will do a post on the whole embryonic "gill slit" canard that Darwinists believe in sometime. It's hard to make what amounts to Haeckel's old ontogeny recapitulating phylogeny sound reasonable enough to argue against. Perhaps I'll just compare it to some more ancient ideas about embryos that are also amusing.
It is hard to believe that biologists, biology textbook writers and American university professors still believe such things and are still looking for ways to prop up the argument, yet they do.