Panbiogeographic analysis is now used by many authors, but it has been criticised in recent reviews, with some critics even suggesting that studies using the method should not be accepted for publication. The critics have argued that panbiogeography is creationist, that it rejects dispersal, that its analyses are disingenuous, and that it deliberately ignores or misrepresents key evidence. These claims are examined here, and are all shown to be without foundation. The distributions of the molecular clades of ratites have not been mapped before, and they are considered here in some more detail as a case study illustrating panbiogeographic methodology.