Your misquote of Coyne, which you have not only never corrected, but continued to use after it was shown to be a misquote.[1]
See above. An example of where you were told exactly why you were wrong, which you ignored by (i) blaming some-one else, (ii) continuing to lie about your sources and (iii) using the same misquote again as if you’d never been shown it was a misquote.
We know how you responded to this criticism - you repeated your original claim as if it had never been challenged.
Nor is this an isolated instance. There are hundreds more.
But go ahead. Explain how you think you responded satisfactorily to this objection.
You don’t read the works you cite yourself, so why should anyone believe you are willing to read the works cited by others? AFAICR you’ve never answered this.
Which brings me back to Theobald. Your response to his article being cited was to copy part of the index and not address the contents at all. You show no sign of even reading that article, let alone trying to understand it or discuss it. This isn’t an isolated incident either.
Which, along with your continued ‘quoting’ from sources you haven’t read - which has been repeatedly criticised and which you cannot possibly not know you are doing - renders this:
… just another lie.