Darwin was wrong, Part 2

Number of enraged comments? At the time you wrote this, I had written the only dissenting comment on Darwin Was Wrong (which I assume is the article you are referring to)(the one non-enraged comment also did not come from the "atheist community" as I am a Christian). I don't know what you are talking about when you claim someone (presumably me) said you don't have a right to state facts. Evolution has nothing to do with believing that the universe is a "happy accident". I believe that God created the universe, and there is no contradiction between that and evolution. Saying that a quote comes from a respected source has little impact when you don't say what the source is. Brain size may be less important than organization in determining intelligence, but it is stil useful in showing relationships between species. Bipedality does not "prove" a human relationship but does provide evidence when combined with other features. Could you please explain your statement about the Laetoli footprints? The way I interpret them, they are the "smoking gun" for australopithecines being bipedal because they were clearly made by bipeds and no fossils of any other kind of hominin have been found from that time. The rest of your article goes into other subjects, but I want to know how anyone can claim that the medieval Catholic Church was not Christian.