Perhaps the evidence for the vast scope of Darwin’s theory really isn’t as strong as biologists over the years have been telling each other.
Lang and Rice cite a number of articles to show that loss-of-function mutations are just a small minority of those found in studies of organisms.
Their review pretty much completely misses the mark. Nonetheless, it is a good illustration of how sincere-yet-perplexed professional evolutionary biologists view the data.
Professor Lenski’s contrasting of the frequency versus importance of evolutionary changes is misconceived and his illustrations are inapt.
Alas, Coyne’s review of Darwin Devolves has too little intellectual content to sustain any real engagement.