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.
In one paragraph Lents et al. twice cited sources they thought contradicted Behe, and twice suggested he ignored or dismissed contrary evidence.
What do you give a great scientist for his birthday when he’s already got everything?
I found their review utterly convincing — although probably not in the way the authors might hope.
Professor Jerry Coyne, for one, says that HarperCollins, publisher of Michael Behe’s forthcoming book, “should be ashamed at [sic] itself for publishing the biology equivalent of flat-Earthism.”