Faldage, you ask ... for some references? Please see citations I provided above. They have stood the test of time. Why do you find them less convincing than Foster?
You note that the great majority of the people are ill-informed, merely believing what they have read.
1) So what? The "great majority of people" have the same basis for believing that the world is round -- but that does not disprove (or prove) their belief. Your point carries not logical weight.
2) I, however, specifically referenced and cited "informed" opinion.
3) By normal scientific standards, the opinion of one person (e.g., Foster) does not merit accepting his conclusion until it has been tested in the crucible of peer review.
You seem to have accepted Foster (without reading him); you say that disagreeing with him is like believing that Dr. Seuss wrote the Declaration of Independence. Faldage, your statement is IMHO credulous and snippy.
