Link for link then.

Icons of Evolution

Quote
"It is clear from Wells's treatment of the "icons" and his grading scheme that his interest is not to improve the teaching of evolution, but rather to teach anti-evolutionism. Under Wells's scheme, teachers would be hostile to evolution as part of biology instruction. Wells and his allies hope that this would open the door to alternatives to evolution (such as "intelligent design") without actually having to support them with science", and "In conclusion, the scholarship of Icons is substandard and the conclusions of the book are unsupported. In fact, despite his touted scientific credentials, Wells doesn't produce a single piece of original research to support his position. Instead, Wells parasitizes on other scientists' legitimate work"


Gosh, that sounds familiar. But we all know, don't we, that Wikipedia is full of lies typed by evil people who want to deceive the righteous.

Icons of Obfuscation

Actually there are a dozen or more articles on TalkOrigins that dispute Wells' claims in detail. But we all know that TalkOrigins is full of lies typed by evil people who want to deceive the righteous.

I prefer to debate specific points rather than letting videos and links do the talking. This of course means that one has to be able to put forward their point in their own words and show they understand what they are talking about.