Dr. Michael Behe author of Darwin's Black Box

[angellous_evangellous]

Here you go:

Evolution Vs Creationism – Family Guy Style » Religious Freaks

[Revoltingest]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

Here you go:
Evolution Vs Creationism – Family Guy Style » Religious Freaks

Nah....derivative.
And without the great music or Homer.
Simpsons rule!

[Krok]

Originally Posted by ttechsan

Michael Behe's Blog - Uncommon Descent

Evolutionist please reply specifically with scientific answers as there are many things to reply to. Also in his book pages (171 - 177). I would also like explanations to his science as he has IMHO more credentials than others on here.

Michael Behe thinks that astrology is "science".

It has also been found by both the scientific community and by the courts that ID is not science.

Why do you want people to give a scientific reply to a religious blog?

Anyway, Michael Behe has been shown, in court, under oath, to be talking nonsense and twisting the truth. By a scientist with better credentials than Michael Behe on this subject. You really should read more.

[fantôme profane]

Originally Posted by ttechsan

Michael Behe's Blog - Uncommon Descent

Evolutionist please reply specifically with scientific answers as there are many things to reply to. Also in his book pages (171 - 177). I would also like explanations to his science as he has IMHO more credentials than others on here.

How disgustingly disingenuous. You expect us to respect Behe's position because of his credentials, but I could easily name thounsands of scientist with equal or greater credentials who insist that intelligent design is complete nonsense. That apparently holds no weight with you, why do you expect us to bow to Behe's degree?

And let me also remind you that Behe is an "evolutionist". Behe believes in common descent. He believes that humans and chimps share a common ancestor, that all life shares a common ancestor, and he even believes that mutation and natural selection explains most of this.


(I don't know why we bother with this)

[work in progress]

Originally Posted by ttechsan

Michael Behe's Blog - Uncommon Descent

Evolutionist please reply specifically with scientific answers as there are many things to reply to. Also in his book pages (171 - 177). I would also like explanations to his science as he has IMHO more credentials than others on here.

Have you read Michael Behe's books or his blog? I'm of the opinion that very few fundamentalist Christians looking for reasons not to accept evolution, ever crack open these books...otherwise they would discover that these "intelligent design" guys actually accept most of evolutionary theory already!

For example: about 15 years ago, a co-worker who kept trying to debate me about the Bible being a literal, historical record dropped Behe's first book - Darwin's Black Box on me. Between the covers, I discovered that Behe already accepts the basics of evolutionary theory. For example, this is located on p.176 if you have your copy handy: "I believe the evidence strongly supports common descent." He doesn't really bother defending that statement, and just leaves it hanging, so most of the creationist fans who bought the book, likely glossed right over it.

But the full implications of accepting common descent of life on Earth means that all life on Earth is physically connected, and there is only one tree of life. And the gaps in the the fossil record which we hear so much about, are gaps in the record, not in the tree of life. Since Behe claims that there are "irreducibly complex" changes that could not occur through natural selection, but require some sort of divine hand, this would make him a theistic evolutionist, not a creationist! Now, do I really have to read his follow-up book too?

[painted wolf]

Originally Posted by Krok

Michael Behe thinks that astrology is "science".

It has also been found by both the scientific community and by the courts that ID is not science.

Why do you want people to give a scientific reply to a religious blog?

Anyway, Michael Behe has been shown, in court, under oath, to be talking nonsense and twisting the truth. By a scientist with better credentials than Michael Behe on this subject. You really should read more.

To be fair to Dr. Behe... I don't think he thinks that astrology is science. He admitted that changing the rules to allow teaching ID would also allow teaching astrology. Thus ID and astrology are as scientifically valid as each other.

IMHO, He knows that ID isn't scientifically valid... it's faith based. But, it's also his main source of income and his personal obsession... His reputation is staked on it. I'm also sure that he actually believes he can make ID scientific.

wa:do

[Revoltingest]

Originally Posted by painted wolf

To be fair to Dr. Behe... I don't think he thinks that astrology is science. He admitted that changing the rules to allow teaching ID would also allow teaching astrology. Thus ID and astrology are as scientifically valid as each other.

Methinks you're too charitable to ID. Astrology is at least
amenable to the scientific method, since it is testable.
Even palmistry & phrenology beat ID in this respect.

[painted wolf]

Originally Posted by Revoltingest

Methinks you're too charitable to ID. Astrology is at least
amenable to the scientific method, since it is testable.
Even palmistry & phrenology beat ID in this respect.

Ah, but the claims of ID have been tested on several occasions... which is why every example of "Irreducible complexity" has been disproved in short order.

But yes, the key argument of ID is untestable and thus less scientific than astrology, phrenology or palmistry. In that I was being way to charitable... won't happen again.

wa:do

[Revoltingest]

Originally Posted by painted wolf

Ah, but the claims of ID have been tested on several occasions... which is why every example of "Irreducible complexity" has been disproved in short order.
But yes, the key argument of ID is untestable and thus less scientific than astrology, phrenology or palmistry. In that I was being way to charitable... won't happen again.
wa:do

I have noticed that you suppress your vicious side more than is healthy.

[Bob Dixon]

Originally Posted by Revoltingest

I have noticed that you suppress your vicious side more than is healthy.

I just started frequenting these Evolution/Science Debate forums.
I think that her vicious side is being manifested in me. Some of the things I read here just make me want to explode.