Roger Stanyard writes:

Coel "You seem, in several of your posts in this thread, to have a habit of taking creationist claims as conclusive, overlooking that creationist claims are quite often dishonest."

You've just move from the sublime to the ridiculous.

Not at all, for example take this post of yours:

I also point out that the modern day creationists virtually all claim that Hitler was a Darwinist" and an atheist. They've produced copious amounts (or drivel) to support their claims.

There you are, quoting creationist progaganda as an argument that Hitler was a Darwinist or could sensibly be regarded as a Darwinist (why else would you write that?). It's as though you've actually swallowed their propaganda! The truth is they've produced nothing, not one scrap of evidence, to support their claim that Hitler was a Darwinist.

The man was so incoherent in his views that just about anyone can claim that he was a Darwinist or a creationist according to their own prejudices. From my understanding Hitler wasn't even intellectually capable of distinguishing creationism from evolutionary biology.

Again, this is just wrong. Hitler was likely well above average intelligence, getting good grades in school near the top of his class. People who found and lead whole movements don't get to do so by being stupid. His book Mein Kampf is actually coherent and presents his arguments clearly and at length. Dunces simply can't do that. He is far more able to sustain a coherent argument at length than, for example, Alister McGrath or Rowan Williams (where accusation of being muddled, confused and incoherent are fair).

And because of this it is simply not true that his writings and speeches can be sensibly interpreted as being those of someone believing in Darwinism. A straightforward reading of his works says exactly the opposite. (Ditto atheism by the way.) In your reluctance to accept that you are falling for Christian propaganda, failing to appreciate that the Christian progaganda on this issue is flat-out lies and fabrication deriving not from any evidence but from pure prejudice.