Hi Defender:
I have heard of "The Triumph of Evolution" by Niles Eldredge. I was troubled by your recommendation, since it does not seem to acknowledge the many scientific refutations of old arguments, and continues to postulate many that we in the creationist camp have already answered.
Since I'm the one that first recommended the book, I suppose it makes sense that I reply to this. Eldredge's book is quite unashamedly anti-creationist. It was written to counter the (at the time) quite mainstream YEC assertions, and does a pretty good job of giving the concensus opinion of science/scientists on the particular issues covered. I recommended it because Asgara had asked for a counter to some of the basic creationist positions. In spite of your denials, and in spite of AiG's "Arguments we feel creationists should no longer use", most of the "invalid" arguments are still being espoused by a large percentage of YEC's. Hovind, Baugh and others are still promulgating the exact same fallacies - and in fact are spending even more time doing so than they were when the book was first published. At least, based on the continual references to those arguments from self-proclaimed evilution-slayers that come on these message boards.
I note that you say you've "heard about" the book, rather than reading it. As an aside, I have spent many interesting hours perusing the AiG and ICR websites and articles. My question to you is more fundamental than how you can denigrate a book without having actually read it. Rather, have you read ANY mainstream book dealing with biology or evolution? I don't mean Dawkins. I mean, Wilson or Futuyma or Mayr, or even Quammon ("Song of the Dodo") or Barlow ("Ghosts of Evolution") or Weiner ("Beak of the Finch"). If so, which ones? And if so, what was it about the book that you found uncompelling or faulty? I think that might be a more productive approach here.