Buller has the ability to present these concern in an eloquent way for the benefit of the public, exactly to the same degree as Pinker is able to do this service for the ideas of the UCSB. Buller sums up what many others have been saying for years. Pop EP is objectively questionable science; that other people have their own questionable ideas has little bearing on the subject, and having one's own good ideas is something that Pinker and Diamond would profit from. What surprises me is your suggestion to be upset about the reluctance of people to treat sociobiology or EP as a set of axioms or unquestionable facts proved by experiment. It took Darwinism many ups and downs, several major iterations, the emergence of genetics and molbiology, and so on just to be considered as a serious contender for the theory of evolution. It took 100+ years to make the original idea into something minimally plausible and worthy of a note. In the current version of the EP one sees the idea that may require decades if not centuries to reach this minimal level of plausibility, and this theory is more likely than not to unravel in the process. If the idea can be convincingly proved, there is no need in playing politics, in involving the laity, in fighting the sceptics, in being upset about the detractors. The reluctance stems from the fact that it is dubious science whose Darwinian overtones do not make it any more credible. This credibility will come (or not come) only when there is support; claiming the masses in the absence of such support is counter productive. It was good that Darwinism largely fell out of favor at the beginning of the 20th century because in its contemporary form it was intellectually indefensible in its original form; to make it defensible, much needed to be changed in biology; and this change was the focus of the research that eventually put Darwinism on a more firm foundation. It is the same thing with the EP. Right now all it is good for is writing bestsellers full of unsupported claims. Whether it is good for something else, only future can tell, but much foundational change would be needed and new approaches must appear to make it minimally convincing. The very people who upset you are those that are working towards its possible establishment in the future, and those people that sloganeer for it have already said all they can say in the absense of novel insight, adding nothing to their case, which is neither recent nor strong, and only undermining it. If there is any truth in the EP, it will come out, no matter what, and if not, it will go down, no matter what.