They selected teosinte ... and got corn. Excellent!
Stephen Matheson, Professor of Biology
Minds in the Making

Editor's note: The following essay appears on the author's personal blog. It was published in The Open Laboratory 2007: The Best Science Writing on Blogs, by Lulu.com.

Evolutionary science is so much bigger, so much deeper, so much more interesting than its opponents (understandably) will admit. It's more complicated than Michael Behe or Bill Dembski let on, and yet it's not that hard to follow, for those who are willing to try. The best papers by evolutionary biologists are endlessly fascinating and scientifically superb, and reading them is stimulating and fun.

Yet, as an experimental developmental biologist reading work in evolutionary biology, I often find myself yearning for what we call "the definitive experiment." Molecular biology, for example, can point to a few definitive experiments—elegant and often simple—that provided answers to big questions. Sometimes, while examining an excellent evolutionary explanation, I think, "Wouldn't it be great if they could do the experiment?"

READ THIS ESSAY »