Please excuse me for commenting without listening to the podcast, since it is time consuming compared to reading a transcript.

I did a quick internet search on the book and found a critique on whyevolutionistrue.com which noted the book us beautifully written and a lively read. They faulted the author for using sexual autonomy of female birds to support feminist policies and his “demonizing” of the idea that the creatures use fitness cues when mate-selecting because that evokes eugenics and nazism. They object to him using examples from the animal world to support human social policies. They note various creatures that mate by force, cannabilistic behavior, etc..

The overall view of creatures evolving into creatures of higher order seems powerfully supported by their physiognomy such as overall appearance and homologous structures, arguing for common descent.

However, it takes the analytical chemistry of microbiology to properly test the transformative powers, or lack thereof, of natural selection by way of mutation. Now we can finally see and appreciate the mind-bogglingly complex chemical machinery of the cell and understand the immense difficulty of natural selection through mutation to produce the “irreducible complexity” we observe.

It is normal for scientists to fight tooth and nail against advances that threaten their theories, prestige, funding, and power. Darwinism and neoDarwinism are used to declare the preeminence of everything from capitalism to communism and have spawned innumerable fields of study dedicated to application of these concepts.

Molecular biology has put neoDarwinism into crisis. Why not interview the immensely qualified Michael Behe? Up-to-date information and analyses may be found at evolutionnews.org.