[whowhatwhy]

- It is a pointless exercise for the scientific community to engage with crackpots and people dishonest about their actual goals (e.g. promoting religious views, fighting atheism, whatever it is they believe they are doing).

You haven't touched on one single aspect of any of the actual ideas being discussed. All you've offered is ad hominem attacks on the purveyors of the ideas.

[the_af]

His ideas are fringe pseudoscientific ideas at odds with mainstream biology, and he misrepresents the current knowledge he claims to "demolish". He relies on pop culture books from discredited people who are not subject matter experts and who have a religious agenda.

What aspect is there to touch?