Evolution Intelligent Design

Eric Metaxas interviews Michael Behe

Spread the love

Media personality and author Eric Metaxas talked to him in his university’s home town in Pennsylvania:

Eric Metaxas interviews biochemist Michael Behe on “the new science about DNA that challenges evolution” as told in Behe’s book, Darwin Devolves

Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #3,561 in Books (See Top 100 in Books) 9:50 am EST

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Darwin-Devolves-Behe-3D-836x1024.png

See also: Michael Behe’s response to Lehigh colleagues’ criticism If Behe’s critics were right, new life forms would be popping into existence all the time. But increasingly, political correctness matters so much more than truth to nature that we will be hearing stranger things yet about the Darwinian magic they espouse. Also, Response, Part 2 and Part 3


Michael Behe: How To Tell If Scientists Are Bluffing

4 Replies to “Eric Metaxas interviews Michael Behe

  1. 1
    PaV says:

    Eric Metaxas is quite the humorist. I enjoyed his interviewing style–he kept everything on point and relevant. Very nice.

  2. 2
    ET says:

    I keep getting the feeling that the people who have reviewed his book didn’t actually read the book. Lents try to wrongly pin the word “devolves” on Behe in an attempt to mock him, but Behe himself provided a quote from another scientist who used the word “devolves”.

    Behe makes it clear that his is an argument that pertains to what random, as in happenstance, mutations can do when paired with the culling process of natural selection. As Behe has said, his reviewers just assume all genetic change is happenstance and then nature sorts it out- lather, rinse, repeat. They don’t seem to understand that is the very thing that is being debated.

    That and the fact they just grant themselves all of the metazoans and developmental biology required. As if the differential survival of happenstance change just magically didit. Not once realizing that if they could actually demonstrate such a thing then Behe’s writings would be rendered moot and ID would be dead.

    For example Art Hunt wrongly harps on t-urf13 as refuting Dr. Behe all the while oblivious to the fact he doesn’t have a mechanism capable of producing the plant in the first place.

  3. 3
    Belfast says:

    Let me put in a small plug for Dr Behe.
    A while back I read a line in one of his books which I thought could not be correct, so I politely wrote to him basically asking if I had misread. He replied just as politely and remarked that the book was now 15 years old.
    He replied within 24 hours, that is a record for any question I have ever sent.

  4. 4
    PeterA says:

    The Mystery of the Origin of Life

    According to a nationwide survey, more than two-thirds of atheists and one-third of agnostics believe that “the findings of science make the existence of God less probable,” while nearly half of self-identified theists believe “the findings of science are neutral with regard to the existence of God.” But what if there is another option? What if the discoveries of science actually lend support to belief in God?

    Taped at the 2019 Dallas Science and Faith Conference at Park Cities Baptist Church in Dallas sponsored by Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture.

Leave a Reply