From two people, from very different perspectives. First, German biologist Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig, formerly of the Max Planck Institute, comments on Michael Behe’s new book, Darwin Devolves (February 26, 2019):
Regarding the evolution of the systematic categories in question (the finches, for instance, and others), I urge you to check out Behe’s new book. Incidentally, I must admit that I was fascinated that he has come to virtually the same conclusion as I have. Yet he has done so by a totally different approach. (See my book, in German, about Species Concepts, Evolution and Creation.) Concerning the eye, as I have written and as I note that Behe agrees, Darwinian theory substitutes imagining for reasoning. In affirming this, Dr. Behe’s analyses are stunning and absolutely convincing.
Apart from further intriguing comments on Lenski’s famous investigations on bacteria, you will also find deep insights on the multiverse theory, complexity theory, self-organization theory, evo-devo, niche construction, developmental plasticity, natural genetic engineering, the machinery of splicing, major transitions in evolution, game theory, and more. Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig, “Behe’s New Book, Darwin Devolves — Stunning and Absolutely Convincing” at Evolution News and Science Today:
Readers may recall Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig from the carnivorous plants stories, for example, Geneticist W.-E. Loennig Replies To Darwinist Nick Matzke: Which Is More Important: Darwin or Facts?
I’ve been commissioned to review Behe’s new book, out next year, so I am reading it now. I’m about 70 pages in and so far, all I’ve seen is, “Gee, this stuff is complicated!” I am hoping it gets better because supposedly Behe is the best of their bunch. Ken Miller thinks highly of him, despite their public tussles. He better get somewhere fast in this book or I don’t think I will accept the commission to review it because there’s nothing to review! Nathan H. Lents, “Reviewing Behe’s “Darwin Devolves”” at Peaceful Science
The post is dated October 25, 2018. Lents did finish reading the book, apparently, and later admitted, (November 23, 2018)
I’ve now finished the book and I agree that it was more than that and it did make its way to some good scientific discussions of how mutations can effect beneficial change by diminishing or destroying function to a gene/protein. Unfortunately, in my reading, Behe completely omits mention of examples that are contrary to this and that’s what is frustrating for us.Nathan H. Lents, “Lents and Swamidass: Our Questions for Behe’s Darwin Devolves” at Peaceful Science
Readers may also recall Nathan Lents, author of Human Errors: A Panorama of Our Glitches, from Pointless Bones to Broken Genes, from “Nathan Lents Is Still Wrong About Sinuses But Is Still Writing About Them
We’ll have more on the book soon.
See also: A peek at Mike Behe’s new book, Darwin Devolves
And what, the carnivorous plants? Oh yes, here:
Remember that Darwin-eating plant? Now threatening to eat Darwinian Nick Matzke …
Carnivorous plants: After eating Darwin, they couldn’t resist further culinary adventures
The plants that eat vertebrate animals
Carnivorous plants: The 200-year headache.
Follow UD News at Twitter!