The rest of his contribution, by contrast, is intensely disputable.
Further update: the book had a new edition released in 2005 and it sounds like he kept doubling down. The one negative review actually looked into the author's background and found he contributes to shit like creation.org, so maybe not the most un-biased researcher out there. I'm open to new ideas, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Will this end up like the spotted hyena and male peacock which appear to buck evolution by natural selection due to their weird reproductive/mating rituals? Yeah, having a pseudo-penis or enormous tail are not the most advantageous for surviving child birth and escaping predators, but they do actually help propagate genetic material, which is the real name of the game. On its surface, onvergent evolution may seem counterintuitive, (looking at you, octopus eyes), but it's really not that complicated when you take a hot second to think about it.
