Listening to Stephen Meyer on the Michael Medved Show today, I was struck by something. A series of callers tried to challenge Meyer on whether the science in Darwin’s Doubt is really just an argument from ignorance. Steve patiently explained, more than once, what the difference is between an argument from ignorance or “personal incredulity” and an inference to design based on positive knowledge of how information like that in the genome arises.
There was a caller who said he was a biology teacher in Ohio, and another from Woodinville, WA, who claimed to have an undergrad degree in biology. None of them faired very well. I found myself thinking about what a poor reflection it is on the chiefs among the large body of international Darwin defenders that they leave the response to the most important arguments against their theory to the small fry like these callers, who go only by their first names and locality (“Bob in Ohio”).
The callers were hostile enough, but none were very effective. Where is Jerry Coyne in this debate? Where is Dawkins? Even PZ Myers? Or Lawrence Moran, who promised “I’m planning to read [Darwin’s Doubt] as soon as I can get a hold of a copy — probably sometime in August in Canada.” (I’m still puzzled by that one. The book was published in June in Canada as well.) It would seem noble for the generals to go into battle alongside the ordinary foot soldiers, putting themselves at risk as well, instead of hanging back at a safe distance.