To the Editor,
I, like many readers across America, just read Michael Behe’s bio of Richard Dawkins, just listed as one of the 100 people who have shaped our world, and I have to say that I am extremely disappointed.
By publishing comments from Michael Behe, you willingly lent credence to a pseudoscientific and apologetic ideological activist. Evaluating an admittedly controversial figure from the point of view of a fraudulent crackpot demeans the public discourse, and it is clear to me that you are capitalizing on the gullibility of many Americans at the expense of reason and intellectual honesty.
You could have found any of thousands of reputable experts to critically evaluate Richard Dawkins – but you chose a creationist and treated him as though he were reputable. Why?
Please retract this example of sloppy and irresponsible publishing.
(Thanks to Greg Laden for his leadership on writing letters to the editor)
Late addition – Behe’s description of Dawkins focuses on:
With the big questions of life and mind supposedly solved in principle, Dawkins has in the past several decades abandoned research, and turned instead to persuading society of the correctness of his views.
Wow. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.