To RichardofYork, comment #18;
I am a layman, in that I have no scientific training (apart from at comprehensive school to age 16), and what I have since learned I have learned from books and publications. However, one of the first things that struck me about the 'Mount Improbable' metaphor was that, in a very real sense, evolution had to have 'built' the mountain as it climbed, because to imagine that it ascended an existing mountain is akin to believing that;
a) there was a goal or end-result in sight all along;
b) there was a 'conscious or otherwise intelligence-led decision to reach that goal, and;
c) That were the 'mountain' already fully pre-formed, then once evolution reached the peak it would have to either stop there, retrace its steps or leap off the steep precipice on the opposite side.
This is obviously be the exact opposite of how evolution works and continues to work.
Are you sure that you're not confusing laymen such as me who do understand the mechanism of evolution as-is, with the religoons who only (grudgingly) accept evolution if they can assign to it a heavenly purpose?