response to criticism

Recently in the journal Evolution, two of my colleagues in the Lehigh University Department of Biological Sciences published a seven-page critical review of Darwin Devolves. As I’ll show below, it pretty much completely misses the mark. Nonetheless, it is a good illustration of how sincere-yet-perplexed professional evolutionary biologists view the data, as well as how they see opposition to their Read More ›

With the release of Michael Behe’s Darwin Devolves, the scientific dialogue between its detractors and defenders continues. Here we collect some of the most noteworthy criticisms and responses by Michael Behe and others. Find the most comprehensive coverage and most recent responses of Darwin Devolves at Evolution News. Re: Lents at Skeptic Magazine Regarding “Behe’s Last Stand: The Lion of Intelligent Design Roars Read More ›

Most readers of Evolution News likely know the central thesis of Stephen Meyer’s bestseller, Darwin’s Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design. Meyer argues that the functional biological information necessary to build the Cambrian animals is best explained by the activity of a designing intelligence, rather than an undirected, materialistic evolutionary process. Most reviews of Darwin’s Doubt curiously omitted Read More ›

Stephen Meyer addresses Nick Matzke’s quickly formed critique of Darwin’s Doubt. Matzke’s critique of involved the field of cladistics. Matzke claims that you can use cladistics to establish “collateral” ancestors of the forms seen in the Cambrian explosion. For more information about Darwin’s Doubt and Stephen Meyer, visit www.darwinsdoubt.com.

Stephen Meyer discusses his radio debate with Charles Marshall. The debate was very substantive and addressed a number of topics related to the Cambrian explosion including the validity of self-organizational processes as an explanation for the Cambrian explosion. For more information about Stephen Meyer and his New York Times bestseller Darwin’s Doubt, visit www.DarwinsDoubt.com.

Stephen Meyer responds to another criticism by Charles Marshall of Meyer’s book, Darwin’s Doubt. Marshall argued that the rewiring of genetic regulatory networks can account for animal development and the establishment of new forms. Meyer explains that alteration of gene regulatory networks actually causes the shutting down of animal development. For more information about Stephen Meyer and his New York Read More ›

Stephen Meyer responds to another critic of his book, Charles Marshall. Marshall is a Cambrian paleontologist who reviewed Darwin’s Doubt in the journal Science. Marshall, unlike other reviewers, addressed the main argument of the book, the information problem. Although he addressed this argument, he didn’t refute it, but merely presupposed sources of information, begging the question. For more information about Read More ›