Carl Zimmer is presenting a series of posts by Ken Miller in which Miller takes on DI-flack Casey Luskin's attempt to claim that he misrepresented research regarding the evolution of clotting proteins when he gave testimony in Kitzmiller v. Dover (way back in 2005).
See here and here. The third - and final - part will appear tomorrow apparently.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Disco. hustler Casey Luskin pleads ignorance to fend off an argument by Ken Miller:
In a recent post, I noted that Ken Miller misrepresented Michael Beheâs arguments on the irreducible complexity of the blood clotting cascade in his book, Only a Theory. When I blogged at the end of last year about…
Over at PT, Nick piles on Luskin:
One aside: the fact that Behe wrote a chunk of Pandas is important in several ways apart from pure history. First, this makes Pandas, rather than Darwin's Black Box (or really, a few of his web articles), the first published expression of Behe's IC argument. Second…
Well, I've read through the Discovery Institute critique of my work (PDF). I am not impressed. Neither is Carl Zimmer, who has experience with this sort of thing. PZ, meanwhile, has a good refutation of Casey Luskin's attack on my credentials.
[To tell you the truth, PZ, Luskin's criticism is…
As a companion piece to the last post, I recommend the sledgehammer vs. the fly exchange between Ken Miller and Casey Luskin. Miller is a biologist at Brown University, and is the author of Finding Darwin's God and Only a Theory, two of the most important popular-level evolution books of recent…