[madprof98]

I was prepared to really hate Coulter's discussion of evolution--didn't even read it for weeks after I'd finished the rest of the book--but actually, it's quite interesting. I wondered how a biologist on the other team would respond. Now I see: He responds with the same malice he criticizes in Coulter herself, without once responding to her argument.

[Dante Alighieri]

He, in the actual article, linked to his discussion of Ann's points here: http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050822&s=coyne082205

[stands2reason]

This is a biologist? Where did you get that?

(I couldn't read the whole screed, it was ridiculous.)

[Antoninus]

I was prepared to really hate Coulter's discussion of evolution--didn't even read it for weeks after I'd finished the rest of the book--but actually, it's quite interesting. I wondered how a biologist on the other team would respond. Now I see: He responds with the same malice he criticizes in Coulter herself, without once responding to her argument.

I felt exactly the same way. I think that evolution is the most reasonable explanation for animal speciation. But Coulter's writing on the subject was thought-provoking--particularly her expose on the treatment of Richard Sternberg by some within the scientific community, as well as her description of the Scopes Monkey Trial. Very informative stuff.

By writing a review of this variety, this guy is proving Coulter's point: If you step out of line with the Left's "creation myth", they will excoriate you and try to ruin your life.

[stands2reason]

He's an ecologist. Ick.

[b_sharp]

"I was prepared to really hate Coulter's discussion of evolution--didn't even read it for weeks after I'd finished the rest of the book--but actually, it's quite interesting. I wondered how a biologist on the other team would respond. Now I see: He responds with the same malice he criticizes in Coulter herself, without once responding to her argument."

Coyne made the mistake of trying to respond to Coulter in kind. Her attack on evolution was rife with strawman creation and logical fallacies such as poisoning the well, she did not once address any valid scientific argument. She really had no arguments to respond to in a scientific manner that haven't been dealt with many times.

[jonrick46]

"He responds with the same malice he criticizes in Coulter herself, without once responding to her argument." This is just what I noticed in this criticism of Coulter. It makes me suspect that this is a political writer rather than one with any scientific qualifications.