I enjoyed "Godless" but the chapters on evolution were the weakest parts of the book.
I agree with her premise that evolutionary biology, along with cosmology and geology, make up the left-wing creation myth. But everything she wrote could've been copied almost verbatim from the Creation Institute's website.
There were also several flat-out factual errors. Four examples; comets are not made up predominantly of organic molecules, the Judge in the Dover trial did not take it upon himself to decide if creationism was science, Dembski did not create a new scientific discipline or anythinig useful at all, and evolution can be easily disproved.
She just rehashed all the rhetorical arguments from the non-scientists who play to folks who like to think ignorance is proof of faith. Those arguments don't get the attention of Christians who work in the sciences because they won't address the facts.
I would have signed on as her science advisor for free so I don't know why she didn't contact me. ;)
I agree, the chapters on evolution in "Godless" dragged on forever. But, up to that point, is was pretty good.
Nice for her to write about the Scopes trial being an ACLU set-up. Amazing that all these "ground-breaking" trials I learned about in high school and law school were nothing but shows to get a topic or view point pushed through the courts.
You gave some direct criticisms. Thank you. I have to do some reading/research now. :)