In his brief foray into the BCSE he demonstrated an ability to ignore the holes in his own very verbose monologs. He now seems to be further developing this talent on UD.
Just how many blindspots has he got? It seems that this depends on how many gaps in his own knowledge he has.
The common feature of JonathanM’s posts is above-average research for an IDist, but way below-par research in terms of actual scholarship. He knows just enough to seem informed, but doesn’t bother to look up any of the actual research on the questions he asks – he just assumes that whatever problem with evolution that he thinks up over breakfast is some crushing objection that none of the experts has ever thought about before.
Usually this boils down to not a God-of-the-Gaps-Human-Knowledge argument, but a God-of-the-Gaps-in-JonathanM’s-Knowledge argument, which is, I think, an even more devastating mistake than the usual God-of-the-Gaps argument.Oh and by the way the above post points out that the Discovery Institute has thought up another jolly wheeze - censor any comments on Jonathan's posts that point out that there are major holes in his arguments - then claim that no one has any answer to his arguments.