A few relevant facts for those who shoot from the hip, without thinking:
1. Reporters and writers don’t contribute or control article headlines, a privilege their editors reserve to themselves.
2. Nor do reporters and writers have much (or any) say about what goes on the magazine cover. See the editors for that.
3. Graham Lawton was reporting on scientific developments and arguments that have been underway for more than a decade (although accelerating recently). Go here, for instance, for a summary of a recent meeting reviewing those developments. Lawton interviewed some of the participants at this meeting — as a science journalist, not a partisan.
The point is, if Lawton didn’t report the story, the story would still be there.
So the “shoot the messenger” rhetoric of Jason Rosenhouse and others is triply misdirected. Wild and erratic gunfire reflects the lack of judgment of the shooter, not his target.
Note to Joe Felsenstein: I didn’t “pounce” on the Telegraph or New Scientist articles, if “pouncing” means claiming they support ID. See my comment in the original blog thread:
…ID doesn’t emerge as the leading competitor directly from these puzzles, which is why Bapteste, Doolittle, et al., vigorously reject ID.
Naturalistic evolution with multiple starting points, a mangrove-like geometry, etc., is still naturalistic evolution.