How would you argue against the author of Darwin’s House of Cards: A Journalist’s Odyssey Through the Darwin Debates?
Throughout his career as a journalist, Tom Bethell interviewed some of science’s top thinkers and discovered deep flaws in evolutionary thinking. In this documentary, Iconoclast, as well as his book, Darwin’s House of Cards, he reflects on his discoveries and discussions, drawing together the main themes of the Darwin debates from Darwin to today.
What’s your best argument against that view?
See also: Laszlo Bencze on Tom Bethell’s Darwin’s House of Cards