Author: Michael Behe
Lessons from Polar Bear Studies
Computer methods of analyzing mutations are widely used because they are generally accurate. They do not suddenly lose their accuracy when I cite them.
Train Wreck of a Review: A Response to Lenski et al. in Science
Richard Lenski has spent decades overseeing the most extensive, most acclaimed laboratory evolution experiment conducted to date.
Coyne and Polar Bears: Why You Should Never Rely on Incompetent Reviewers
A very common way to try to discredit an argument is to exaggerate it, ignore distinctions an author makes, and/or change carefully qualified claims into bizarre absolutes.
Woo-hoo! In Science Review of Darwin Devolves, Lenski Has No Response to My Main Argument
In a few days I will offer a detailed rebuttal. But here is the overwhelmingly important point to notice right up front.
Here’s How to Tell if Scientists Are Exaggerating
Here’s the simple test to tell if scientists are exaggerating wildly. Let’s call it: “The Principle of Comparative Difficulty.”