Q: What is the purpose of this book?

A: The purpose of this book is to educate the reader in all aspects of the evolution controversy, and to do so in an impartial unbiased manner. The book covers all material necessary to an understanding of the controversy: history, relevant scientific facts, points in dispute, major schools of thought, and public policy implications.

Q: Why did you guys write it?

A: We were fed up! Too many invalid arguments, too many "facts are irrelevant" attitudes, too much mixing of extraneous philosophical ideas and arguments with science, too much propaganda, too little objective analysis, too little impartiality, too little quest to put the key ideas to rigorous experimental test. In short, we felt that there was a need to write a book that would set the record straight and hold everyone's feet to the fire.

Q: Why should anyone believe you?

A: Argument from authority is the weakest form of argument. No one should believe anything about the evolution controversy on the basis of authority. The facts, theories, and arguments must speak for themselves. We believe that our book speaks for us. If you do not think that it is well-written, carefully argued, well-substantiated, and impartial, you should not believe it. Similarly, you should not believe anything that anyone else writes about the evolution controversy if it is not carefully argued and well-substantiated (very little of it will be impartial, however).

Q: Why is a book like this needed? Everyone knows that the critics and opponents of evolution are yahoos.

A. Well not quite. This is an example of the very kind of propaganda that led us to write the book. There are in fact very intelligent people on all sides of the controversy. This does not mean that all (or any) of their theories are correct, but it does mean that there are areas of legitimate disagreement. We hope to enlighten readers about these areas, so that they (the readers) can investigate matters and reach their own conclusions, rather than accept propaganda from any school.

Q: Why did you choose just four schools to analyze?

A: After thorough examination, we felt that those schools (Neo-Darwinism, Creationism, Intelligent Design, and Meta-Darwinism) pretty much exhaust the field of scientific theories about evolution. It is important to distinguish the question of what scientific theory best accounts for the relevant facts, from the question of what philosophical or religious interpretation of the scientific theory is most appropriate. This book is restricted to an examination of scientific theories about evolution (or theories that purport to be scientific). The other question will be the subject of a book now being written that will cover, in a similar objective fashion, the range of philosophical and religious interpretations of evolution.