No problem. I know people have lives to live.
And what is an "objective" view in your understanding of the Nature of Science, Harley? I'm just wondering because I think that true and full objectivity is hard to come by where historical appraisal is involved in the process of doing science. This perspective about evolution being primarily a 'historical' concept contributes to the way I am able to hold both mainstream science and the Christian faith simultaneously. Both are historically mediated conceptually. So, when I refer to what I've learned from evolutionists either Christian or atheist, I tend not to get very disconcerted about it in relation to my faith in Christ. And as far as I know, the evolutionary Christian scientists that I read/study use the same measures and similar praxis that their irreligious counterparts do.
Anyway, I appreciate the thoughts and studies done by some Christian advocates of Intelligent Design, and I don't discount everything they say. It's just that there is a lot of philosophy that is tied up within the doing of science and, presently I don't find I.D. arguments overly compelling. At least not just yet. But who knows? Maybe someday, some bit of evidence for design will be brought forth that impels me to 'see' what I haven't noticed before. This is why I remain open to all philosophical considerations as they are plied to the protocols of science, and unlike the materialist perspective of Philosophical Naturalism, there really isn't much of anything in Methodological Naturalism, comparatively, that requires I ignore what proponents of I.D. might bring to the table of discovery and discussion.