You have brought up many subjects, almost all of which I have seen addressed here in one form or another. Using the search function will lead you to some of the previous debates.
In order to make much progress it helps to settle down to one idea at a time. This doesn't mean that you can't suggest or participate in multiple threads until you find the ones you want to support the most.
I imagine that rather than an attempted point by point refutation most evolutionist posters are waiting for you to settle on one of a many points you bring up.
In order to form this debate, here are cursory responses to some points. I will not continue this as a debate past these points until later, when a new thread arises from this( to not put much energy in this if it's a driveby).
The main point about the creation of the Universe is not necessary to the relevance or evidence about evolution, which deals not with origin of the Universe, or with the first creation of life(thru special creation or abiogenesis.) Evolution deals with the way life has changed over time and not origins. However, there are several threads about abiogenesis and cosmolgy here.
Microevolution, kinds, 1st LOT, 2nd LOT, special animal design, transitionals, Nebraska Man ( a favorite of mine), false probability analogy, Lucy, great apes not currently evolving to man, angular momentum, explosion in a print shop ( another false probibility exercise ), quote mining, and doubt of natural formation of all elements are some of the points you bring up.
By the way, I have looked at drdino's site a few times. He favors the debunked angular momentum argument and more than once quotes about the camel and gnat. Perhaps Mr. Hovind provides some of your material. I've found the material in Reasons to Believe or Answers in Genesis as much more reasoned ( if still wrong IMO ) than Hovind.
ABB
This message has been edited by Arkansas Banana Boy, 04-25-2005 07:34 PM