I had fun analyzing this conversation.
Loved the conversation about how science textbooks have changed. I thought science was memorization. That’s why I didn’t enjoy learning it, and why I only took the minimum.
@NLENTS mentioned one piece of evidence can be really persuasive. That makes me happy. Let me go find you some 
Kenneth Miller said “If we did not have evidence of a single fossil, the genetic and molecular evidence [for evolution] would be overwhelming.” Great! Now prove that we weren’t front-loaded with design and weren’t not devolving slowly. You should be able to take Genetic Entropy apart and smash it.
Kenneth Miller mentions creationists aren’t interested in coprolites.
Maybe he should define which particular organism shouldn’t be there, so we can go find that for him and then he will have to concede
In Kenneth Miller’s mousetrap explanation, he said that the “subset of the parts is functional” - Great, that’s devolution too! Thanks for proving the point.
@swamidass you asked Kenneth Miller about exaptation. He answered based on phenotype and nothing else. Check back on the conversation with Behe. At 50:42, Behe is specifically referring to molecular machines and talking about things at the genetic level. Hence why I said this.