President Deborah Haarsma suggests that I mischaracterized the perspective of the organization’s reviewers in my response to them.
Recently in the Wall Street Journal, science writer Nicholas Wade contributed a review of Bill Nye’s new book, Undeniable: Evolution and the Science of Creation.
On Independence Day, it’s appropriate to review the sources of our rights as citizens.
“Neo-Darwinists say that new species emerge when mutations occur and modify an organism…I believed it until I looked for evidence.”
Such constructive, respectful debate, in multiple media, was extremely encouraging.
The authors of a paper in Current Biology present the problem of the Cambrian explosion — the rapid emergence of new forms of animal life — as it own solution.
In my previous replies to Marshall’s review in Science of Darwin’s Doubt, I’ve responded to his critiques of the main argument of the book.
According to Charles Marshall, I argue “that paleontologists are unable to explain the Cambrian explosion, thus opening the door to the possibility of a designer’s intervention.”
To rebut the central argument of Darwin’s Doubt, Marshall must deny (or push from view) what we know about what new forms of animal life require as a condition of their existence.
Leading paleontologists and evolutionary biologists (such as Dr. Marshall) are nowhere close to solving the Cambrian enigma.