I said nothing positive or negative about the man. I pointed out his field of study and questioned why the author didn’t mention it.
****************************************************
Your premise appeared to be that Bergman was trying to hide something, and/or Gelernter is unqualified to evaluate Charlie’s theory.
I absolutely believe that Bergman purposely omitted Gelernter's field of study.
Don't you?
Let me ask another way. If Gelernter were a renowned evolutionary biologist do you think Bergman would have mentioned that?
As to Gelernter's qualifications to evaluate evolutionary theory, the reader has no way to evaluate if Bergman won't even say what his field of study is.