Comment 28 by Roedy :

This is the second imperious article I have read of Dawkins trashing Wilson. He just baldly states that Wilson is wrong and Dawkins is right. I said so. End of story.

It may well be true, but that is no way to argue the point.

He is is arguing like the Pope. Egad.

The article needs to be redone explaining why Wilson is wrong. What is the evidence? -- not just all the experts, especially me, say so. Part of the problem is the evidence is too familiar, too obvious to Dawkins. He has not the patience to elaborate it for a non-expert audience or even to properly recognise that it needs to be explained. Perhaps someone else should write the article for him.

Roedy, did you actually read the article? Or did you stop after the brief 300-word excerpt that is all that we were allowed to reproduce here? As always when we post articles that are published elsewhere, we put "Read on" prominently at the bottom. "Read on" means Read on. You click it and you get taken to another place, in the present case to the website of Prospect Magazine, where you will find almost exactly ten times as many words, explaining in great detail why Wilson is wrong.