Why am I done with this project?<\/p>\n
Well, apparently the paperback edition has just been published and it has a new chapter that specifically deals with complaints from actual scientists (Don Prothero, Nick Matzke, and Charles Marshall). This is fascinating because \u00a0it took Meyer (and Luskin) over a year to come up with a response to Matzke, who they didn’t bother with because he read the whole book in a day or two. Sadly,\u00a0while he “deals” with them, he STILL gets things wrong. He handwaves away statistical data and goes with his gut. Which defeats the purpose of statistics.<\/p>\n
Here’s Nick Matzke’s response<\/a>, which I encourage you to read if you are interested in more mistakes by Meyer… who still doesn’t understand that people check him on this.<\/p>\n Now, why am I done with my response? Because a new edition exists with new information. I don’t have that edition and I have no intention of getting it. That means that anything I write further about\u00a0Darwin’s Doubt<\/em> will be rejected by all creationists because I “haven’t read the updated edition and that deals with my complaints”. I know this will happen because it has happened in the best. Indeed, I predict that at least comment will say that I’ve stopped reviews because I really know that Meyer’s new chapter crushes all opposition. That’s plainly not true, unless he corrects every mistake that I (and Matzke, and Prothero, and Marshall, and Moran, and Coyne… etc) have mentioned and corrected (and apologized) for all the quotemines… in that one chapter.<\/p>\n Now, to be clear, several creationists have pointed me to various places in\u00a0Darwin’s Doubt<\/em>\u00a0that would take care of my issues with the book. So far, we’ve been on a wild goose chase that just makes Meyer look more and more incompetent. I’ve added quotemine after quotemine to Meyer’s record. I’ve pointed out fundamental mistakes in what he thinks about evolution and science.<\/p>\n And still, Meyer’s supporters won’t answer a simple question, “Why do you consider Meyer a reliable source after all of this?” \u00a0They refuse to answer it. They acknowledge the question, but have flat out said they will not answer it. Why don’t they defend Meyer or refute the claims made by actual scientists?<\/p>\n I know exactly why they don’t defend Meyer. Because they can’t. They know that Meyer is a liar. They know he misrepresents science. They know he misrepresents scientists.<\/p>\n And they don’t care, because Meyer is a Christian who is determined to destroy evolution (and all science) and replace it with religious fervor. Don’t believe me? \u00a0Look at the first goal of the Wedge Document<\/a>, which was written by the organization that Meyer co-founded and was vice president of.<\/p>\n Governing Goals<\/strong><\/p>\n