Although Noble is much better versed in the current state of biology than Dawkins and he uses that to bolster his argument, he gets very defensive when cornered. To me, the evidence he presented is irrelevant; he simply imposes his ideas about evolution onto these experimental findings. One such example is his reference to the mutation frequency increase in tumor cells. Cancer cells don’t change the mutation frequency; it is the increased mutation frequency that drives some but only some normal cells to cancer cells, and the process of cancer development is Darwinian. The idea that these data suggest that there is a Lamarckian aspect in evolution is nonsense. Dawkins was good at poking holes in Noble’s argument and elaborating his counterarguments. But I agree that the debate was very civil.