Being a PhD geneticist and a creationist, I was disappointed that Murray Peshkin did not give references for the statement “Hundreds of Darwin’s predicted missing links have been found.” I find quite the opposite. The scientific turmoil behind whether birds are descendants of dinosaurs is but one example of how the popular press does not accurately reflect the disagreements in the scientific community. As Storrs Olson, curator of birds for the Smithsonian Institution, stated in a 1999 letter to National Geographic,

The idea of feathered dinosaurs and the theropod origin of birds is being actively promulgated by a cadre of zealous scientists acting in concert with certain editors at Nature and National Geographic who themselves have become outspoken and highly biased proselytizers of the faith. Truth and careful scientific weighing of evidence have been among the first casualties in their program, which is now fast becoming one of the grander scientific hoaxes of our age—the paleontological equivalent of cold fusion.

If Peshkin could provide some solid references, it would add credibility to his opinion.

Also, equating Charles Darwin’s and Gregor Mendel’s theories does not work for me. Mendel observed inheritance patterns and developed a theory of Mendelian genetics, which is verifiable in simple reproducible experiments. His theory of genetic inheritance provides the mechanism for natural selection, which is observable. Darwin, on the other hand, postulated that natural selection would extend to species changes and therefore provide the mechanism for macroevolution. I have never found that to be observable. As traits are favored through selection, genetic information is reduced, not increased. Man’s very behavior exhibited through gene conservation activities is evidence that genetic information is not gained, as required for macroevolution to occur, but is actually lost.