Furthermore, Colson and Pearcey cannot even identify cogent new arguments for intelligent design. Instead they rely on naive and easily refuted arguments, such as the "irreducible complexity" of the eye (nonsense, there are numerous examples of intermediate stages of light recognition and processing) or that a fish evolving a lung would drown (we have air-breathing fish, and many amphibians change from a gill-breathing to a lung-breathing state).

In summary, if you want another stock argument for intelligent design, or if you like to read arguments that can easily be picked to pieces, get this book. Otherwise, don't bother.