Darwin Devolves: The End of Evolution?

Then I don’t think you understand either his argument or our rebuttals. My other essays on this book will have more space and maybe help you see our point more clearly.

2 Likes

Yes, exactly. His complete and total misunderstanding of the LTEE is shocking. He expects to see things (innovation, creativity) that the experiment is precisely designed NOT to generate. It’s a nearly perfect recipe for streamlining, efficiency, and rapid growth, and those are the adaptations that emerge.

3 Likes

Hi Nathan,

I look forward to your longer analyses. Science reviews don’t give the space one needs.

5 Likes

There are several articles in the works @pnelson. Nathan has one coming out on his blog, and next week his longer in a magazine comes out. I am planning an article here at PS too. It is possible that Lenski might explain more too.

From my point of view, however, I think Dennis Venema explains it aptly:

If that is the tack Behe wants to go, he is more than welcome to do so. It would be another example of not engaging with legitimate critique.

1 Like

I’ve lost count and this may be mentioned elsewhere, but there is yet another response from EN this morning:

https://evolutionnews.org/2019/02/cited-to-attack-darwin-devolves-study-devolves-on-close-inspection/

To quote:

The review is a hit piece, but it’s so insubstantial that Behe must feel like he’s just been bludgeoned by a stick of cotton candy leavened with fairy dust. (The fairy dust here are the oft-recycled Darwinian fairy tales — e.g., whale evolution.)

I propose a new term to describe this strategy of panic-induced spam - “spamic”.

5 Likes

4 posts were merged into an existing topic: Science Review Offers False Accusations about Chloroquine Resistance

Boy, they are losing it.

@NLENTS check this out.

https://darwindevolves.com/criticism/

Notably, they leave out our responses. Perhaps we should create our own page, to give a more complete picture?

1 Like

The ID folks clung to him… even though he never once discusses Adam and Eve as special creations!

@swamidass is more public with miraculous Adam and Eve than Behe ever was.

1 Like

Which ones? My polar bear article is there. My post about “devolution” isn’t, but that’s more recent and they haven’t responded to it. They may not and that’s fine. I think they’ll only post links to either positive reviews or negative ones that they actually respond to and I don’t see a problem with that. It’s a promotional page for the book, so it’s normal to be selective in which reviews you want to direct people to. I have pages for both of my books and I don’t include links to the negative reviews. (Each book got one negative review from a serious place - I’m not counting the DI, but I DID choose to link to those because why not? I don’t consider those serious. But that was my choice. I didn’t feel obligated to.)

1 Like