Re: Behe and IC


*** wrote:
Someone complained that Behe did not provide enough details to
evaluate Irreducible Complexity. He provided a lot of detail about
the "Cilia" in chapter 3 of Darwin's Black Box, starting with a sub
chapter entitled: "The Cilium." He discusses parts that make up the
cell, the chemistry and how they work together including chemical
components.

Now, it is way beyond my abilities to judge whether Behe is pulling
the wool over my eyes, but to my limited knowledge, he has provided a
lot of detail including a diagram and the tools used to get the
information.

***

The plain and simple facts are that Behe can't tell anyone if a system
is his type of irreducibly complex. Just ask him. He admitted that he
couldn't do it in Dover under oath and that nothing any ID proponent
had ever come up with had been tested at this time or scientifically
verified. His descriptions of systems that he claims might be IC are
basically snow jobs until he can come up with some definition and means
of demonstrating that these systems are his type of IC. He admits that
he can't do this at this time, but that doesn't stop him from claiming
that certain systems look like they might be IC.

No one should care until he can verify his baseless assertions in some
way. It is as simple as that. IC is bass ackwards IDiot type science.
They are using an assertion that they can't verify in any meaningful
way (IC) to infer something about nature that no one in the history of
science has been able to demonstrate even exists (ID). Behe's science
really is just that bad.

Have you read Philip Johson's admission that there isn't any science in
ID worth talking about at this time? Johnson is credited with being
the godfather of the ID/Wedge creationist scam, and if he admits that
the science just isn't there, why would you believe him when he was
claiming that there was something to ID, but dismiss his admission that
the science was never there, now? These guys have been forced to admit
that they have been scamming all these years after Dover. Dover left
no doubts, you shouldn't have any either.

Ron Okimoto

.

Quantcast