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.