Regarding Matzke, Coyne, and <em>Darwin's Doubt</em>, a Reader Asks - Evolution News & Views

Evolution News and Views (ENV) provides original reporting and analysis about the debate over intelligent design and evolution, including breaking news about scientific research.

Evolution News and Views
Responses NEWS

Regarding Matzke, Coyne, and Darwin's Doubt, a Reader Asks

Thoughtful reader Alex who's enjoying Stephen Meyer's Darwin's Doubt asks:

I found it funny that Jerry Coyne did not want to review the book because he was not a paleontologist and that he would leave it up to them, but he supported Nick [Matzke]'s review even though he is not a paleontologist. Why did he not quote a paleontologist who read the book?

That is a good question. Casey Luskin has already demonstrated what a non-paleontologist Matzke is. Actually, Coyne didn't merely "support" Matzke's review, he presented it repeatedly as a perfect excuse for not engaging seriously with Meyer's book, despite Coyne's own role as author of a blog called Why Evolution Is True.

  • "To see the problems with the book, have a look at Nick Matzke's review at Panda's Thumb." (June 28, 2013)
  • "[A]ccording to Nick Matzke's review, [Darwin's Doubt] is not only laden with ignorance and errors, but touts God The Intelligent Designer as responsible for the rapid 'Cambrian explosion.'" (June 23, 2013)
  • "[O]ver at Panda's Thumb, Nick Matzke, who's finishing his Ph.D. in biology at Berkeley, has written a very long but excellent review..." (June 21, 2013)

While using Matzke as his shield, Coyne also prognosticates: "Note that the DI will continue to ignore negative verdicts by scientists like Matzke and others." And that is truly hilarious; see here, here, here, here, here, with more to come.