Phillip E. Johnson ----------------------------------- Jefferson E. Peyser Professor of Law School of Law University of California, Berkeley
Not at all. An argument from authority can have validity, but it isn't necessarily decisive, especially at a time when many professions are grounded in the erroneous philosophy of materialism, as much of evolutionary theory seems to be.
Moreover, as a lawyer, Johnson is familiar with the structure of arguments and in identifying philosophical assumptions. If an error in argument or philosophy exists in evolutionary theory, then Johnson should be better able to find it than a natural scientist.
Johnson is carrying on the task of materialist debunking that was well established in the 20th century. In music, Shoenberg's "system" reigned in university music departments for decades while it drove people from concert halls in droves. Few people took Freudianism seriously, yet it was an accepted branch of psychology for decades. And we all know how the "scientific" theory of Marxism reigned in university poli/sci departments until recently.
Finally, Johnson is surrounded by able scientists and philosophers at his foundation which can be found at www.arn.org. William Dembski is a notable example.