Hurd cites nine papers to show that Meyer’s discussion of the composition of the earth’s pre-biotic atmosphere “is outdated.” Yet there are good reasons that Meyer did not cite these papers: six fail even to discuss the composition of the earth’s prebiotic atmosphere (contrary to Hurd’s claim); two make highly controversial claims contradicted by leading authorities in more recent publications; and one confirms two key claims that Meyer himself had already made (and carefully documented) in Signature.
Citation bluffing is one of the refuges of a dying orthodoxy and it goes down well with “aren’t I good?” girls, male and female, reliving them of the burdens of and thinking, knowing, and growing. They say, you may have evidence, but we have Professor Boofus and Professor Doofus and Professor Goofus. Who can beat that?
Meanwhile, re Darwin’s Doubt:
- Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #14,585 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
After all this time.
As noted earlier, at this point, no one cares whether Christians for Darwin choose to trash the book or read it or neither or both.
Hat tip: Sri Nahar Ha-Limmud
Note: Apparently, Signature in the Cell, Meyer’s earlier work, praised by intelligent people, was the original target of troll rage, as noted in Comment 1 below. Sorry, we are so used to hearing from and about trolls on Darwin’s Doubt, it is hard to keep the attacks straight. Trolls hate accounting of any kind.