I don’t object to the evolution content by any means—indeed, I find it interesting—but isn’t attacking the work of one particular evolutionary biologist a bit off-topical to overcoming bias? (I had the same thought about the recent “congratulations to Paris Hilton” post—while it could have been used to point out the biases involved in signing/not signing up to cryonics, it didn’t attempt to do anything of the kind.) Of course, you could argue that it’s important to dismiss false information going around, in order to prevent people from being biased when thinking about evolutionary psychology… but to do so seems exceedingly narrow—if you want to debunk every person spreading false information about science, you won’t have the time to write about abtual biases.
I don’t object to the evolution content by any means—indeed, I find it interesting—but isn’t attacking the work of one particular evolutionary biologist a bit off-topical to overcoming bias? (I had the same thought about the recent “congratulations to Paris Hilton” post—while it could have been used to point out the biases involved in signing/not signing up to cryonics, it didn’t attempt to do anything of the kind.) Of course, you could argue that it’s important to dismiss false information going around, in order to prevent people from being biased when thinking about evolutionary psychology… but to do so seems exceedingly narrow—if you want to debunk every person spreading false information about science, you won’t have the time to write about abtual biases.