The part where a civilized human being, who happens to pride himself on following science, can't seem to read through a post that is 2 times shorter in word count (original, not content written by you, or stated in previous posts of similiar length) than a short high-school essay in a discussion, where scientific proof is required to present a credible statement. Anyway, here's a few fun facts:

• Scientific journals (meant for getting the full picture of a scientific or historical discovery, with it's nuances and possible errors) are from "3,000 to 10,000 words in length". Source: http://www.informationr.net/ir/14-1/paper391.html
• Picking ideas up and using them at face value without any research is what fundamentalist Christians (as well as fundamentalists from other religions) do
• Discussing without providing at least credible sources makes your claims untrustworthy
• Ignoring the opposition's arguments in a discussion for being "too long" while praising science (full of nuance,small errors that do matter and countless reading hours of discussion on a single discovery) makes you look uneducated, pretentious, hypocritical and rather thick.

Need a tl;dr for this as well, bud?