Title: A Lawyer Dissects the Evolutionary Dogma
Product review: I am amused by those who criticize Johnson, a lawyer, for examining evolutionary theory. While lawyers are not scientists, they often delve into scientific issues even during their legal practice. Moreover, lawyers are explicitly trained to detect and expose fallacious arguments, of which evolutionary theory has quite a few (that's putting it mildly). One does not have to agree with every detail of Johnson's excellent analysis in order to appreciate his deconstruction of evolution. Finally, those who complain that legal standards of evidence should not be applied to ostensibly scientific theories should recognize that they have themselves to blame: Were evolutionary theory not taught as fact to laypersons and unsuspecting students, it would not be also put in a position where it is subject to the highest standards of evidentiary reasoning--and where it fails miserably.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
