Here again I will point out how you are close minded.
There are many scientists who dissent from Darwins theory, that is fact.
Whether or not the website that cites these scientists are religeous or not does not discredit the scientist, unless of course you have undeniable proof the data is incorrect, then I would agree with you.
So, do you have that undeniable proof, if so please provide it or admit you are opining.
You are consistently using common logical fallacies, which may explain the errors in your thinking process. I will create a thread on this topic because they are so pervasive, but I suggest you become familiar with them before that -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
I suggest starting with the informal fallacies. This entire subject that there are scientists that cannot understand evolution is a red herring, meaning that it is A point that is serving to distract from THE point, which is the fact of evolution by natural selection. If you look around, you will be able to find dissenters from every theory, or every fact. The dissension means nothing to these theories and facts, they have not been overturned and the overwhelming majority of scientists in their respective fields still go on to employ them to describe reality. The very fact that you need to use numbers like 800 to support your position shows that you have already lost, as our position has so much backing that we have no need to speak of numbers. The fact is that evolutionary theory could possibly be overturned and falsified in many different ways, it is just that not a single person has ever come close to doing this. Not even the ones of which you speak.
But, if you insist, let's go through the exercise. We've already begun, as you've offered up material which I've picked apart for you (you're welcome) to show how science was not applied in order to reach it's major claims, and I've showed exactly where their misinformation lay, and I corrected its deception. Now another of your fallacies needs addressing, The Burden of Proof -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof
It is up to the one making the positive claim to provide proof for their position, it is not up to their audience to disprove them. We can easily see why this is so: their are SO many whacky claims in the world that it would be a full time job for anyone to attempt to disprove them all. But with each party providing proof of their own claims for others, it is possible for every claim to be supported or not through such proof. I assume (because I could not open your file) you recently threw a list of 800 scientists that dissent from EBNS, and stated that they are not necessarily creationists or christians, nor display any bias or agenda toward the evidence for evolution.
Why don't you go through that list, choose the scientists that you verify as credible, and explain why you agree with them about their reasons for not understanding EBNS. We can then go on a case by case basis and see if they are justified in their dissent. I’ve showed how each of those scientists in your video were not justified in their dissent, and I showed exactly where and how they were wrong. I then went on to post the correct answers. I look forward to the opportunity to look over the scientists and their reasons you post from that (or any) list, unless you won’t do this and possibly be accused of being lazy, or even worse, close-minded…
lol