Letter to New Scientist:
Compare and contrast:
"Nobody is arguing—yet —that the tree concept has outlived its usefulness in animals and plants… [I]t is still the best way of explaining how multicellular organisms are related to one another" [Graham Lawton, New Scientist, 24 Jan 2009].
"Darwin was wrong: cutting down the tree of life" [New Scientist cover, 24 Jan 2009].
I appreciate you need to hype up your headlines to sell more dead trees, but I expected better of New Scientist—especially just one week after your own editorial vowed to strive to avoid sexing up headlines in future. Do your marketing people think they've identified a gap in the creationist market or something?
I presume, in future, whenever you show a clade diagram in one of your articles, its caption will come with the disclaimer, "Please Note: This is wrong".
More science, less marketing hype please.
Richard Carter, FCD
The Friends of Charles Darwin
Charlie is our Darwin