If you admit that rationalwiki is biased, then there isn’t much point in referring me to it, if we’re trying to get to the bottom of things. As for Coyne and other neo-Darwinists, it’s not the science that I object to primarily, although I obviously think there are doubts. It’s when they make unwarranted philosophical deductions from the science, e.g. atheism, materialism. As we’ve discussed elsewhere, which comes first, the atheism or the science?

I do agree with you that I don’t always do enough scrutiny of some of my sources, rational or otherwise. That would apply especially to the two Christians, whose books I merely skimmed. This is regrettable, but I’m not a full time academic, so can’t do as much reading as that would require. My purpose is not always to provide watertight science, rather to stir some people up out of their materialist complacency, merely to get them thinking. That said, I’ll take Sheldrake over Coyne any day. It’s impossible, I would say, at present, to subject some of his ideas to the scientific scrutiny you suggest.

I would be interested to know how you think I misinterpret Jung. If you’re referring to our conversation about the collective unconscious, then I would suggest that it’s you who misinterpret him. (I note that you haven’t commented on my piece about Jung and synchronicity.)