Staddon’s piece is topical, well written, and carefully reasoned. Coyne is of course free to disagree with Staddon’s conclusions.
The criticisms keep coming. It’s hard to keep up. Lents, in fact, just yesterday added additional commentary on Behe’s use of the chart.
Starting today, you’re invited to sit back and enjoy a five-part series on polar bear genes in light of Behe’s thesis in Darwin Devolves.
While historically belonging to the pre-modern 19th century, Darwinian evolution teaches what amounts to the deconstruction of what was understood before to be the great design of biology.
Evolutionists play a game, and it’s a shallow one. So what’s the truth about science, and religion, and how they do or do not fit together?