Rating: 
Summary: Critique of Darwinism from a scientific standpoint
Review: As a theological student published in genetic, endocrine and clinical research, I was very interested in this book. My background was that of pre-medical education and then clinical and basic research. I took a course in evolution which brought up many questions in my faith which were not resolved for some time. The book was of great interest to me, someone well versed in both sides of this argument.
Johnson is one of the few Christian writers who takes on evolution (more specifically Darwinism) from a scientific standpoint, rather than from a theological standpoint. Most unbelievers disregard much of the theological arguments, so a critique from this standpoint was necessary to challenge evolution, if progress was going to be made for Creationism. Despite having a deep feeling regarding one side of the argument, Johnson does a great job of remaining unbiased in his arguments. He is also a lawyer, but he seeks guidance from many who are learned on the subject to check his material. This makes his argument a sound one. He steps through the different ideas of Darwinism from Natural Selection, which he of course admits is observed in nature. Then he goes on to discuss how this idea is expounded upon to create the theory of evolution without credible data. He says that scientists have neglected their normal methods of research to attempt to prove evolution rather than disprove it, which is the standard in science. Johnson makes a great argument for the illogicality of evolution, but admits science has no alternative hypothesis, so it persists.
This book is a must for anyone in the field of biology or theology. It thoroughly discusses the obstacles and holes in the evidence.
There are some issues with the book:
Johnson's reference system is poor at best. He does not notate each find or bit of evidence, which would help in checking up on his work.
He does mention Lamarck and the fact that evolution often speaks as Lamarck did despite science's discreditation of his theories.
Johnson also spends very little time on the fact that there would be many variations in the basic materials of life if everything had occurred randomly. Meaning, there would be more than 5 nucleotides and 20 amino acids found in organisms if they had evolved randomly.
Overall, the book does a very good job of referencing the writings of the preeminent scholars of evolution (mostly Gould and Darwin) and makes a superb case against Darwinism.
Rating: 
Summary: The book has already been PROVEN false
Review: Yes I said PROVEN. A CHRISTIAN who is also a scientist has broken down the outright lies in this book step by step.
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/honesty.cfm
Why any person would still consider this book at all valid is simply astounding. I say again a CHRISTIAN, who is also a scientist has shown MULTIPLE outright LIES in this book.
Rating:
Summary: This is why OJ got off
Review: I read Johnson's book Defeating Darwinism about 3 years ago, and was not impressed with his arguments against evolution in that book. Yet, after reading this book I have become a fan of Johnson's critiques of Darwinian theory. As a law student myself, I have come to appreciate Johnson's literary and argumentative techniques because he writes from the perspective not of a scientist, but as a lawyer examining the evidence to see which case is the strongest. Some criticize Johnson for not being a scientist, and in fact that was the criticism I levied against him three years ago, but as a lawyer Johnson is able to do something no scientist can do; Namely, examine the facts as they are and root out assumptions that individuals hold which help them interpret the facts in a certain way.This is exactly what Johnson does in this book as he examines the evidence for and against Darwinian evolution. Johnson correctly notes that a vast majority of the scientific establishment have embraced the philosophical system of materialistic atheism as the logical partner of Darwinian theory. Therefore, there is no purpose to the universe's existence or any purpose for mankind's existence but everything is the result of law and chance. This type of worldview is antithetical to a religious worldview and therefore religion and science often do clash because these two philosophical systems are at odds with each other. In addition, Johnson notes that the theory of evolution is slowly collapsing under the weight of new scientific discoveries. Sure, in Darwin's day the lack of fossil of evidence wasn't perceived as a problem because people believed the fossils were yet undiscovered, but the fossil discoveries of the last 150 years have only reinforced the fact the Darwinian evolution contradicts the fossil evidence. Yes, in Darwin's day the cell was believed to be a simple structure consisiting mainly of water and a nucleus, but now molecular biology has discovered that the cell is extremely complex, more complex than any man made machine, and believing such a structure could be created by random, pointless processes is absurd. These are just a few of the ideas brought forth in this book and although Johnson doesn't do much to damage the scientific validity of evolution he servely damages the philosophical foundations of evolution and that is damage enough.
Rating: 
Summary: Neo-Darwinism at the Bar of Reason
Review: Phillip Johnson has taken Darwinian evolution to court and the verdict rendered is guilty. He argues incisively that Darwinism cannot be verified by the empirical evidence. Therefore the very foundation of Darwinism is not rooted in science but a philosophy of naturalism. It is this worldview of naturalism, which colors all the evidence and provides the shaky foundation for Darwinian science. Darwinists have a healthy corner on the market of science by being the very ones who define science in their favor. They argue that the most basic characteristic of science is reliance upon naturalistic explanations. Any appeal to the supernatural or transcendent by definition is excluded. Any form of theistic creationism is therefore excluded. Such a theory of theistic creation is viewed by scientists as non-science and by many as non-sense. The deck has been clearly stacked against theism. Johnson's main task in Darwin on Trial is to show that the conflict is not between science and non-science, but between two competing worldviews. There is naturalism, which by definition excludes all forms of the divine, and there is the worldview of theism that argues for a God who created all things. It is this worldview clash, which is at the heart of the evolution debate. Johnson surveys the scientific evidence offered for evolution and finds it wanting. He deals with natural selection, mutation theory, and the fossil record, the vertebrate sequence, molecular evidence and prebiological evolution. He then examines the philosophical underpinnings of evolutionary theory and argues that evolution as fact is hinged upon philosophy and not science. It is a philosophical theory, which uses science only for minimal confirmation. The philosophical worldview of evolution colors all the empirical "confirming" evidence, which is used to verify the "truth" of Darwinism. The importance of Darwin on Trial is to show that the debate over evolution is a worldview clash. The empirical evidence still needs to be examined and debated, but no longer can either side claim absolute objectivity in interpreting the evidence. Interpretation is filtered through one's worldview and all scientists are required to acknowledge their worldview whether it is naturalistic or theistic. Darwin on Trial is accessible for both scientists and non-scientists. It is an enjoyable read as Johnson is astute in pointing out the many fallacies of Darwinian thought. On more than one occasion you are left in shock that a highly educated scientist such as Gould or Dawkins would make such logically fallacious statements. Johnson also provides a response to his critics as an appendix in the second edition. He responds to Stephen Jay Gould, Michael Ruse and many others who have attempted to debunk his book. If you are new to the debate or just want to freshen up this is a great place to start. The only major criticism I have is that there are no footnotes (only research notes in the back of the book). The documentation is there but a bit hard to follow at times. Other than this small criticism Phillip Johnson's Darwin on Trial steers a helpful course in the murky waters of evolutionary science.
| 
