Behe outs "Intelligent Design" for the pile of junk it is

[neonchameleon]

At the ongoing court trial, Michael Behe has recently made some damning admissions about Intelligent Design. The first and most obvious is that by Behe's definition of a scientific theory, Astrology is a scientific theory. This is because his definition of a scientific theory is almost exactly the same as the standard scientific definition of a hypothesis.

I am, quite prepared to agree with Behe that ID is a scientific theory in exactly the same way that astrology is a scientific theory. I am also prepared to agree that ID is a hypothesis. On the other hand, if anyone can define terms, under my terms, Behe is a load his mother should have spat (I feel sorry for anyone who swallows him).

Rothschild suggested that Behe’s definition was so loose that astrology would come under this definition as well. He also pointed out that Behe’s definition of theory was almost identical to the NAS’s definition of a hypothesis. Behe agreed with both assertions.

The exchange prompted laughter from the court, which was packed with local members of the public and the school board.

Behe maintains that ID is science: “Under my definition, scientific theory is a proposed explanation which points to physical data and logical inferences.”

Behe is also being deceptive even on whether he is co-authoring a sequal to Of Pandas and People

" At one point during Rothschild's cross-examination, the lawyer asked the scientist whether he was co-authoring a book, a follow-up to "Of Pandas and People," with several other intelligent esign moolahs. He said he wasn't.

The lawyer showed him depositions and reports to the court, quoting two of the other authors as saying he was a co-author.

Behe said that he wasn't a co-author of the book but that the statements by those guys weren't false. He said one of the authors was "seeing into the future."

Rothschild asked, "Is seeing into the future one of the powers of the intelligent-design movement?"

Behe didn't answer.

He didn't have to.

Seeing into the future is the province of that other science — you know, astrology."

And he's trying to change the meanings of other words and phrases.

Q And zero is the same number of articles in
peer-reviewed scientific journals that argue for the intelligent design of complex molecular systems?

A The number of peer-reviewed papers in scientific journals which show that life is composed of molecular machinery that exhibits the purposeful arrangement of parts in detail on term, you know, many many many thousands. There are -- I think there are just one or two that mention intelligent design by name.

Q That argue for the intelligent design of complex molecular systems in peer-reviewed scientific journals?

A No, I don t think -- now that you mention it, I
think that I was thinking of something else.

Q And there are zero articles in peer-reviewed
scientific journals arguing for the irreducible complexity of complex molecular systems?

A There are none that use that phrase, but as I
indicated in my direct testimony, that I regard my paper with Professor David Snoke as to be arguing for the irreducible complexity of things such as complex protein binding sites.

Q So one, according to your count?

A Could you repeat the question, I am afraid --

Q I asked you, is it correct that there are zero
articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals arguing for the irreducible complexity of complex molecular systems?

A I would count some other papers as, as impinging on that, on that topic, but I don t -- they certainly don't use the term irreducible complexity.

And he has even lied under oath about the publishing standards of his book.

(I can't be bothered to find more of his claims at the trial).

Anyway, I have been converted - I thought I would never agree with Behe about anything to do with ID - but I am quite prepared to agree that ID is a scientific theory in exactly the same sense astrology is.

Comments

[debslover.livejournal.com]

Besides .... Intelligent design would have included an led panel to indicate sickness or malfunction..instead we have pain or dizziness
Any decent design engineer would have come up with a better way to indicate distress and diagnostics.

[compilerbitch.livejournal.com]

It is always nice to see someone so full of BS have a little of it squeezed out of them. :-)

[elemy.livejournal.com]

Hehehe. So astrology is "a proposed explanation which points to physical data and logical inferences" is it? I never would have guessed.

Anyway, who does he think he is? There's this amazing omnipotent creator who's designed all sorts of amazing creatures in such a way that it mostly looks like they've evolved over thousands of years, but he made a couple of mistakes and Behe has caught him out? And that's more likely than that he just hasn't thought hard enough about how they could have evolved?