About 18 months 
          ago, I read Jonathan Wells' book "Icons of Evolution" and 
          discovered that Wells had claimed that a 1996 LIFE magazine article 
          on human embryos was written by "Brown University Biologist Kenneth 
          Miller." Well, it wasn't. Turns out that LIFE has a staff writer 
          who is also named "Kenneth Miller." I've got a very common 
          first and last name, and this kind of thing happens all the time.
        Friends, be assured 
          that I didn't write the article.
        I e-mailed Wells, 
          pointing out that a careful look at the magazine article would have 
          avoided the mistake, and asking him to correct it.
        He promised to 
          correct it immediately. 
        Such a correction 
          was important to me, since he had used supposed "errors" in 
          the LIFE article to make a case that I had misled readers about human 
          embryology. 
        I picked up a 
          copy of the new paperback version of Icons in March 2002, and saw the 
          extent of his "correction:" The book (page 104) now simply 
          says that the LIFE article was "written by Kenneth Miller." 
          
        Since Icons refers 
          to me by name three other times, each time in reference to textbooks 
          written by "Kenneth Miller and Joseph Levine," his readers 
          will clearly assume that I am also the author of the LIFE article, something 
          that Wells now knows to be false. 
        To compound the 
          error, Wells lists just one index entry for "Kenneth Miller," 
          and the pages next to that entry indicate that the same guy wrote both 
          the LIFE article and the textbooks. In plain language, since Wells has 
          known the truth for more than a year, the "correction" he 
          has made in his book now amounts to nothing more than a common lie. 
          Is he so desperate that he feels justified in falsely slurring the scientific 
          reputation of anyone who disagrees with him?
        Why does his 
          book persist in making a claim of authorship which he now knows to be 
          false? You'd have to ask Rev. Wells, who claims to be interested only 
          in fairness, accuracy, and truth why he feels justified in lying about 
          the authorship of the LIFE Magazine article. I am sure you will get 
          an interesting reply!