So, DrTesla never bothered to answer my question of how old he thought I was. Well, I'll say it anyway - 35. Yep, I stopped being a 'kid' a long time ago.
Honestly, his attitude about college sounds a lot like mine when I was 20. Boring classes where all you do is listen to stuffy lectures and regurgitate whatever you tried to learn verbatim. It took me years to shed that attitude and figure out that what you get out of college depends on what you're willing to put into it. Doesn't sound like he's gotten that far yet, though - and thus thinks spending the time to learn about something he doesn't already know is a waste of time. That certainly explains the way he acts here, and why he complains because of post length and such. I'll bet that's why he likes creationist/intelligent design arguments, because they're not something you have to actually learn. They come, prepackaged, in neat little chunks, easy to figure out and spit back out when needed.
But that's why they're worthless. Learning just isn't that tidy. Science depends on stuff in the real world, which is quite messy and almost never has simple, straightforward answers (unlike the sound bites that pass for news today, and other things along those lines). Simple answers never do a good job of explaining things, which is why simple ideas like irreducible complexity and intelligent design, for all the fervor with which their advocates present them with, simply aren't up to the task of countering established scientific theories, whether it's evolution or other things. In fact, the reason they're kept so simple is because they're false. The more complicated a falsehood gets, the harder it is to keep track of, and the easier it is to spot the holes.
How does science depend on something. It isn't a person.
This can be summed up as "It's Science, you guys. duh" You sound like a Miss America contestant wandering aimlessly in search of a coherent thought.
Jaime, I made a comment about you on the abortion thread. You are gonna love it.