The book has been heavily criticized by academics. Martin Stuart-Fox noted that Holbrook's criticism of natural selection was a "cobble together, in a sort of scissors-and-paste criticism... the book contains no vigorous argument at all. Not only is Holbrook very obviously no scientist, he is no philosopher either."[2]
Ecologist Arthur M. Shapiro in a review for the National Center for Science Education commented:
David Holbrook, Fellow of Downing College, Cambridge, has written a polemic not so much against evolution as against scientific reductionism (which he sees incarnate in neo-Darwinism). He proceeds from revulsion at the existentialist vision of "life as a 'scientific accident.'" He's no creationist but, rather, a from-the-gut free-form vitalist—just as preoccupied with the perceived moral consequences of the Darwinian revolution as any Bible-thumping moralist could be. As usual, he conflates science with scientism and evolution with evolutionism, materialism, and atheism."[1]
The book is said by Arthur M. Shapiro, among others, to have been poorly edited and contain errors such as misspellings of relevant names.[3][1] The book also contains factual errors or misunderstandings.[1]
