NY Times on ID Part 2

Another long (front page and a full inside page)
article in the New York Times this morning about
ID and the Discovery Institute.

In my opinion it was very badly done.

The article begins quoting Behe on the bacterial
flagellum and never quite gets around to refuting
Behe's position.

The article does try to be fair, but all the
counter-Behe stuff is down at the end which
only the dedicated will read.

The article repeats the bit about the probability
of producing a given protein from raw amino acids
as being essentially zero. The rebuttal given was
to say that some mathematicians say that the calculation
wasn't done correctly because evolution isn't random.

Now who is going to understand what the heck *that*
means.

After reading the article my wife pointed out that
evolution is too complicated for folks to understand
without some serious education in the topic.

It will come as no news to hear that I think we are
in serious trouble -- indeed, I think we've lost.

----- Paul J. Gans

.