Rebuttals to Critiques of Meyer's PBSW Article

Fellows of the Center for Science & Culture
Discovery Institute
January 6, 2005
Part I: One Long Bluff

Part II: Neo-Darwinism's Unsolved Problems

The September 9, 2004 issue of Nature reported the publication of an article advocating the theory of intelligent design in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. The article, written by Discovery Institute Senior Fellow Stephen C. Meyer and titled "The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories," was published in the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington (PBSW). [1, 2]

According to the Nature report, "Meyer's article has attracted a lengthy rebuttal on The Panda's Thumb, a web site devoted to evolutionary theory." The supposed rebuttal [3], titled "Meyer's Hopeless Monster," was written by Alan Gishlick, Nicholas Matzke, and Wesley R. Elsberry [hereafter GME], all of whom are staff members of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), an organization that insists there is no evidence against neo-Darwinian evolution and that opposes any criticisms of Darwinian theory in public schools.

Since Nature has given prominence to this hastily written essay, we will respond to it fully, in a series of installments over the next days and weeks.

NOTES:

[1] Jim Giles, "Peer-reviewed paper defends theory of intelligent design," Nature 431 (2004): 114.

[
2] Stephen C. Meyer, "The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories," Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 117 (2004): 213-239.

[
3] Alan Gishlick, Nick Matzke, and Wesley R. Elsberry, "Meyer's Hopeless Monster," The Panda's Thumb (posted August 24, 2004), http://www.pandasthumb.org/pt-archives/000430.html



Part I: One Long Bluff

Part II: Neo-Darwinism's Unsolved Problems