Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Comments from Mike Behe in the aftermath of the publication of Edge of Evolution

arroba Email

Following on the fact that a Canadian writer, Cameron Wybrow, got a positive review of Mike Behe’s Edge of Evolution published, I think it is worth introducing two things this evening:

Go here for more.

There was some interest in my review of Dawkins' book, which I posted a link to, so let me share one I wrote comparing the latest books by Behe and Ayala: http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com/2007/08/heart-of-matter-what-does-god-do.html James McGrath
Notice how often Darwinists like Dawkins, Miller et al hearken back to the Dover trial. They love to cloud the scientific issue by sustaining the well-publicized lie that intelligent design is a faith based enterprise. How convenient for them that an activist judge, low on intellect and high on ambition, could institutionalize that lie and provide cover for them every time they start to lose the debate. Notice also how Dawkins (and Miller) inject Miller’s Catholicism into the mix, popularizing the idea that one can be fiercely anti-design without being anti-designer. If a “devout” believer like Miller can side with an atheist like Dawkins, well, what can we say? Surely, his Darwinism must stem from his disciplined approach to science, not from any ideological bent. It’s only those ID extremists that mix motives with methods and allow their petty religious sensibilities to contaminate their science, not we disinterested lovers of truth. As a Catholic, I resent Miller’s pious fakery, especially because he so recklessly attributes the same quality to his opponents. Adding insult to injury, he apparently has forgotten that his intellectual position of “unguided” evolution was deemed morally unacceptable by Pope Pius XII and even the evolution- friendly Pope John Paul II. If Miller is such a devout Catholic, why does he militate against his own Church’s teaching by publicly embracing a world view that is clearly incompatible with it? The truth is that Miller and Dawkins are both ideologues, and it obviously affects their ability to be rational. If the average twelve-year-old can understand the difference between CS and ID, why can’t they? The answer is obvious. By conflating the two, they keep big lie alive. Just suspend all thought, sit back, and say the word—Dover. StephenB
He knows what he is up against. O'Leary
Brave guy. He has a doctorate! Does that mean they are gonna crucify him up there or do Canadians engage in that sorta thing. jpark320

Leave a Reply