I skipped ahead to his "Shermer, Volokh, Evolution, & God" entry.
In it he quotes someone who quotes a gallup poll question about evolution with the possible answer: "Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process."
The "someone" then claim that scientists are making that statement.
Poppycock. No scientist worth his salt would make that statement. You can't prove a negative, so why make a statement you have no hope of proving?
The statement was simply a very badly worded answer by Gallup to a poll question.
Dude, Tim Scanlon has entered the fray in Delong's comments! Alas, there is no mention of photocopying policy, but he does acutely clarify the debate what it might mean to value preference satisfaction.
My only contribution would be to paraphrase (I think) T.H. Green: "Utilitarianism mistakes the idea that governments should take man as they find him, a doctrine for which there is much to be said, with the idea that a man should take himself as he finds himself, a doctrine for which there is nothing to be said."
He's no great shakes at economics. But thick as thieves with poodle-dog.