Garbage. I’ll make three points: Once again, the Times “selects” from a group of people who already agree with this theory, and fails to ask actual evolutionary scientists who are critical of it what they think. Gotta love the “balance.” Also, this piece mostly fails to apply the “logic” of the theory to non-monotheistic religions, implying that monotheistic belief is what is being “proven” here. Finally, group selection is bunk. Quoth Dawkins in this piece (and I suppose I should be grateful it got included) “sheer, wanton, head-in-bag perversity.” That’s rather established in evolutionary biology, and it’s irresponsible for the Times to treat it as accepted, peer-endorsed, current theory.  Read more