I've tried to leave several comments, but "Smith" is not letting any of them through - creationist censorship and all.
He (I suspect it is a he for reasons I will expand on later) makes a number of very idiotic claims and assertions, and in typical creationist fashion, doesn't seem willing or able to support any of them.
Most of his posts there are just whines about "Darwinists", but the following exchange took place here:
factician // January 3, 2008 at 3:37 pm
I’ve already stated my view on this, that evolution should be taught (fully taught, meaning the strengths and weaknesses)
Which weaknesses did you have in mind?
professorsmith // January 4, 2008 at 11:33 pm
The weaknesses that are swept under the rug, of course. Wells has pointed out some. Others are there if one dives in with any sort of eye to find the weaknesses,
like my recent post on whale evolution where a bone is being called a supposed
precursor of whales, found thousands of years after the cetacean split. The uses of vestigial organs could be discussed or the spectacular failures of the predictions of junk DNA, or the failures of evolutionary simulations, etc. There are lots of examples. That none of them are presented means it’s all about indoctrination, not learning.
Now, I won't mention the fact that 'Smith' is likely not a professor at all, and is quite likely a physics major in a non-research Master's program and Intelligent Design/Creationism activist. Nor will I mention the fat that this 'professor' can't spell common biology terms like pheromone and does not seem to have a very good grasp of evolutionary biology and seems to get all his information from creationist/ID sites. Nor will I mention that he refuses to say what his field supposedly is... [for some interesting discourse on this 'new' blog, see this thread on Antievolution.org).
I'll amend this post later to discuss 'Smith's' nonsensical claims re: Wells, vestigials, and junkDNA ...