The dispute started when a review in Science proposed the 2012 article by Näsvall et al. as evidence against Mike Behe’s book Darwin Devolves.
Here’s the simple test to tell if scientists are exaggerating wildly. Let’s call it: “The Principle of Comparative Difficulty.”
David Berlinski notes, “Applying Darwinian principles to problems of this level of complexity is like putting a Band-Aid on a wound caused by an atomic weapon.”
The design inference is obvious but often implicit, because explicit acknowledgement of design in biology carries with it substantial career risk.
It’s worth engaging him, since Swamidass is the relatively rare critic of ID who works at tackling arguments for design in a substantive fashion.