Rating: 
Summary: A devastating critique of the Darwinist faith
Review: It's fascinating to read the few negative reviews of this excellent book that have been posted here. If nothing else, they amply demonstrate the the deeply held bias of evolutionists towards scientism so aptly exposed by Johnson. If you closely read each of the reviews, you'll notice that, once again, his critics fail to actually to respond to any of the arguments Johnson makes. Instead, they resort to ad hominem attacks in the usual attempt of the scientific "establishment" to marginalize the views of anyone who dares disagree with the prevailing orthodoxy, which for the moment is Darwinian evolution. Johnson has exposed Darwinian evolution for what it is: a theory frantically searching for confirming evidence and finding precious little. All their attempts to marginalize the criticism of Darwin's theory as "anti-science" or "creationist" are simply begging the question. They refuse to admit that which would be obvious to an impartial observer: the theory that people evolved from a single microbial cell through natural selection sounds plausible, but has no confirming evidence and would have been discounted long ago if so many didn't have so much invested in it.
Rating: 
Summary: Required reading for evey high school biology teacher.
Review: This is a fun book to read which quite understandably has raised the hackles of many advocates of evolution for which reason they have taken to namecalling and impugning the author's character. Why are we not surprised? It is interesting that several reviewers have characterized the book as being dishonest. To the contrary, Johnson comes across as forthright and full of integrity. He makes clear his Christian convictions but the book never comes across as a religious polemic. He also makes clear that adherence to evolutionary theory is as much a philosophical assumption as it is a plausible interpretation of the data. A theory without competitors is no guarantee of its validity. Johnson is not an advocate of creation science. He simply asks questions that demand an answer and debunks the textbook orthodoxy of evolution as it is taught in science classes today; a questionable orthodoxy which now underlies a secular and materialistic worldview diminishing human value. This book ought to be required reading for every high school biology teacher, better still their students!
Rating: 
Summary: An intelligent but dishonest attack on evolution
Review: While the arguments are well thought out and well presented, we once again see the typical anti-science stance of presenting the evidence against which the author can formulate an argument while ignoring the evidence which would diminish or destroy the author's arguments. This is a very dishonest book.
Rating:
Summary: A superb introduction to the creation/evolution debate
Review: Although most of his arguments are not new, Johnson brings the most important points together in a remarkably concise yet comprehensive format. He has a gift for summarizing the research in each field, then explaining and elucidating the implications of an issue, in just enough words to make it understandable. He points out the mind-boggling complexity of structures like wings and eyes, but does not dwell on these descriptions like some critics, for he realizes that nearly all informed people agree that living things are that complex. The Darwinian Richard Dawkins writes, "Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose," but insists that "Natural selection is the blind watchmaker, blind because it does not see ahead, does not plan consequences, has no purpose in view. Yet the living results of natural selection overwhelmingly impress us with the appearance of design as if by a master watchmaker, impress us with the illusion of design and planning." The premise that appearance can be misleading is not unreasonable. Scientists proved the appearance of the sun revolving around the earth to be an illusion. The problem, which constitutes Johnson's central scientific premise, is that there is no evidence that natural selection has the immense creative power Darwinians attribute to it. The Darwinian claim that the numerous theoretical difficulties with Darwinism are false is based not on scientific fact but almost entirely on pure speculation. Johnson is not a scientist, but his central thesis is philosophical. Darwinians insist that considering divine intervention is unacceptable because science is committed to purely natural explanations. The problem is, how do scientists know *a priori* that natural processes alone are sufficient to produce the diversity of life on earth? Some may argue that this assumption is well-grounded, but scientists do not have the exclusive authority to tell us whether a *philosophical* assumption is true or not. His scientific data are all from reputable scientific sources. To this date I have not seen a single valid criticism revealing a major inaccuracy in the data - and I have read many reviews of the book, some by prominent scientists. Stephen J. Gould's review tried to point out several minor inaccuracies, but he misquoted and distorted the book to make that point. Most of Johnson's factual premises are tacitly conceded by Darwinians themselves. One example: David Raup, an internationally renowned paleontologist, made some remarkable concessions in an essay supposed to *refute* creationism. He wrote the following: (1) Darwin wrote that if smooth evolutionary transitions were not found in the fossil record, his general theory would be in serious trouble. (2) More than a hundred years later, after a tremendous expansion of knowledge about the fossil record, the situation is more or less the same. "We may actually have fewer examples of smooth transition than we had in Darwin's time because some of the old examples have turned out to be invalid when studied in more detail." (3) This can still be reconciled with Darwin's theory in various ways, and although Raup conceded that a more inclusive theory may take its place in the future, he rejected creationism largely because of the belief in a young earth. While Raup's defense may have seemed reasonable, especially to those who take for granted that all creationists believe in a 'young earth,' Raup directly implied that scientists accept Darwin's theory in spite of the fossil evidence. None of the anti-creationist literature with which I am familiar - and I am well-read on the issue - directly contradict what Raup wrote. But with rare exceptions, they try very hard to conceal this implication he was forthright about. Johnson is careful to avoid certain fallacies earlier critics have made - such as the claim that natural selection is inherently tautological, that it involves pure 'chance,' that evolution is 'unfalsifiable,' etc. Some reviews of the book, such as one by Eugenie Scott, caricatured his arguments to make it sound like he'd just rehashed old discredited criticisms. In fact, Johnson repeatedly demonstrates an awareness of how Darwinians respond to criticisms of their theory, and he takes these well into account. The biggest criticism I have of Johnson is his frequent vagueness on whether he is attacking just the theory of natural selection or common ancestry itself. Some proponents of intelligent design, such as Darwin's Black Box author Michael Behe, accept the doctrine of common ancestry. I agree with Johnson that Darwinians use the word 'evolution' vaguely to suppress distinctions between different meanings of the term, but he also seems to be saying that common ancestry is too vague a doctrine to be evaluated independently of Darwinian natural selection. The book would be more persuasive if he was clearer where and when he is criticizing each doctrine. Many of Johnson's articles and essays written after the book are worth reading, but he exhibits a certain shallowness in debating the scientific details of his position with Darwinians. Many other proponents of intelligent design - many of whom are trained scientists - while perhaps not as accessible, support his basic viewpoint with ultimately greater depth and clarity. I particularly recommend the following links: http://www.arn.org http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/fte/darwinism/chapter3.html
Rating:
Summary: Goring Darwin's Ox
Review: Phillip Johnson is not a scientist. He is a legal scholar specializing in logic. And he uses the science of logic to question the logic of science. His attacks on the logic of Darwinism in this book have defenders of the faith crying "foul" from all corners. But he's had his science checked by professionals. The book takes on each facet of Darwinism (fossils, molecular biology, origin of life) and argues why the currently accepted academic explanations fall logically short. Evolution, no doubt, has marvelous explanatory power, but a lot of that has to do with the fact that the term is so flexible that it can be bent and shaped any way you want to. This iconoclastic view of Darwinism is understandably being greeted with little welcome by the mechanistic naturalists. But Johnson et al have gained access to the arena of ideas from which intelligent design advocates have previously been excluded. It's up to them to show us what they've got. And if recent publications are any indication, the debate between Darwinists and intelligent design advocates promises to only get hotter.
Rating: 
Summary: A shoddy case
Review: Johnson's a lawyer, so what is he doing trying to pass himself off as any kind of authority on biology? He presents arguments that look good on the surface but fall apart under close examination. And in more than a few instances, he ignores evidence so he can claim there is none. A dishonest book from a man out of his league.
Rating:
Summary: Best Argument Ever
Review: This is one the most impressive works that REASONS OUT the fraud with Darwinian evolution that the whole pseudo-scientific world loves to romantisize! Critical thinking and emperism should be at the heart of reasoning, not emotional esoterism! Phill does a great job articulating that need that the scientific world needs to reclaim!
Rating:
Summary: Simply Amazing!
Review: Everyone who likes the evolution-creation debate, or doesn't have a clue about the evolution myth, one should read this book - wonderful!
Rating:
Summary: Johnson shows it is a theory of evolution.
Review: This book provides an excellent balance to the many one sided arguments touted by evolution supporters. It provides a clear explanation of the many holes in the theory of evolution and clarifies that, while many tout the theory as fact, the fact is that it is still a theory. Johnson is a lawyer, and provides his arguments from a lawyer's perspective. While one at first would argue that a scientist should be making these arguments, a lawyer truly is the best one to write this book. Truly scientists are needed to provide the many scientific details which are cited in the book, but with the absence of clear physical proof of either the theory of evolution or the theory of creationism, we must turn to legal arguments, citing the evidence, to draw our verdict. Johnson does an excellent job of presenting his arguments. He does not do so one sidedly, but meerly raises the questions which beg to be raised by some one not willing to blindly accept evolution. And in the end, he shows that these questions can not be answered. This book should be a must read in every science class in the United States. While the reader may continue to believe in evolution, at least one would understand that those who do not have a logical basis for not believing.
Rating:
Summary: May be one of the most influential books of the century
Review: Before I read this book, I would have regarded "evolution" as highly probable and bordering on fact. Not that I particularly wanted to believe it. Nor could I offer any reasons for it being true, except the usual vague arguments about "peppered moths" and the fossil record which I absorbed in High School. And which Johnson dismantles in his book. But as far as I knew, everyone believed (important word) in evolution so it must have been true. Looking back, I can't believe that I bought ridiculous notions like the concept of fetal-development-as-a-recapitulation-of-human-evolution or Cricks theory of Panspermia. What a hoot! But the joke was on me... In school, I majored in engineering because I thought it was the last bastion of truth. But what interested me most was what I now understand to be the philosophical assumptions of science. Johnson's lucid philosophical analysis of the debate regarding evolution/creation is a breath of fresh air. The philosophy of science should be mandatory in all schools of science and applied science. Many scientists quoted in the book cannot distinguish between science and philosophy. For example, Johnson quotes Carl Sagan's opening line to the "Cosmos" TV series: "the universe is all that was, is and ever will be." This is an example of one of the most important themes in the book: the assumption of philosophical materialism or naturalism among scientists. The creation/evolution debate as presented by scientists and in the media is grounded on an assumption of materialism/naturalism. Intelligent design is ruled out a priori. Once this is recognized, and once an open-minded reader compares the correlation of the physical data to theories of creation (intelligent design) and evolution (materialism), one can only conclude that the data overwhelmingly supports the theory of creation, broadly defined. Johnson's second most important contribution to the creation/evolution debate is his strategic refusal to advance specific creation scenarios. He recognizes that current scientific data points strongly away from evolution to creation. But strategically he realizes that before a debate can begin regarding the specific mode of Creation, evolution must be exposed for the intellectual fraud that it is and thoroughly discredited. That will take a long time. I think Phillip Johnson's book "Darwin on Trial" will be regarded as one of the most influential books of the century. But like most intellectual revolutions, it takes a long time before news of its arrival reaches the general public. But his "wedge" strategy to attack evolution seems to be the right strategy, and judging by the growth of the new ID movement, he seems to be right on the money. Thank you Phillip Johnson for your wonderful book. You will know the truth and the truth will set you free...
| 
