it might not be clear from the sample i've published since 2013 (i know. it's still a lot.) but i've actually written extensively in opposition to stephen jay gould, who i don't think was a very good scientist.

the article points out that dawkins has mentioned kropotkin only sporadically and mostly dismissively, which i believe is true, and then quotes both gould and chomsky (who i have much more respect for.) liberally on the topic of kropotkin. i don't see any use in flailing against that, and don't actually have any specific rebuttal to anything that was cited.

but, i broadly dislike gould, and broadly prefer to avoid citing him.