So has Denyse O'Leary. But while they both might agree about "human rights" commissions, they don't agree about intelligent design.
Breakenridge apparently has the misfortune of having written a column in defense of Darwinism.
Denyse, who is an expert on the various theories of evolution and intelligent design and a top-flight science journalist, had to respond. She wrote in a Calgary Herald op ed:
Re “What is it about evolution theory that Albertans don't get?” (August 12, 2008), Rob Breakenridge has cobbled together key talking points of the American Darwin lobby. The resulting column is an excellent illustration of why one should not write about big topics without basic research.
The 2005 Judge Jones decision in Pennsylvania, to which Breakenridge devotes much of his column, has not crimped the worldwide growth of interest in intelligent design. That is no surprise. A judge is not a scientist, and Jones cannot plug gaping holes in Darwin’s theory of evolution. Evolution is—contrary to its (largely) publicly funded zealots— in deep trouble, for a number of reasons.
The history of life has not been the long, slow “survival of the fittest” transition that classical evolution theory requires. Life got started on Earth soon after the planet cooled. All the basic divisions of animal life took shape rather suddenly in the Cambrian seas, about 550 million years ago. Later, there was, for example, the "Big Bang" of flowers and the Big Bang of birds, where many life forms appear quite suddenly.
Denyse is the EZ of intelligent design, i.e. she is well-informed, rational, and will eat you for breakfast if you don't have a logical, well-presented, well-researched factual argument.