Culture Darwinism Intelligent Design Video

Michael Behe doesn’t answer his critics?

Spread the love

From the webinar last weekend, highlighting Michael Behe’s latest book, A Mousetrap for Darwin: Michael J. Behe Answers His Critics we can learn:

West was surprised to realize just how voluminous Behe’s record of answering critics actually is. He first thought he could fit the replies in a volume of just 300 pages or so. It turned out that Behe had more than 700 pages available to use. These were culled down in the end to 556 pages.

Instead, A Mousetrap for Darwin demonstrates that “Darwinism is much more fragile” than many people realize, as Behe puts it here. That is the big takeaway. What’s assumed to be an unmovable, unbreakable monument to objective science should at this point, if we were all honest with ourselves, be steps away from shattering.

David Klinghoffer, “Behe’s New “Mousetrap” Book — The Fragility of Darwinism” at Evolution News and Science Today

Here’s the webinar:

Fragility? Well, yes. Even New Scientist offered 13 rethinks of evolution recently. They weren’t doing that a decade ago.

See also: (Reformed) New Scientist 13: We can stop evolution. New Scientist: “Today, evolution remains one of the most powerful ideas in science but, as with all good ideas, it is evolving ” Sure, but if evolution is evolving, Darwinism is dead. Which is fine with us. It’s a big world out there. Making everything sound like Darwin said it is not the way to explore that world.

2 Replies to “Michael Behe doesn’t answer his critics?

  1. 1
    ET says:

    Fragile? Now that we understand that DNA just encodes amino acid sequences and nothing more, evolutionism fails.

  2. 2
    mahuna says:

    I’m about 2/3 of the way through “Mousetrap”, and I like it as much as each of the professor’s previous books. This time around there is a lot more of Behe actually laying out his critics’ complaints, and the critics come away, well, STUPID.
    I have to believe that we may be the last generation that even LEARNS Darwinism. There are of course THOUSANDS of academics whose careers depend on people wanting to get regular reminders about what they had learnt in high school. And when those poorly informed people die off, the market will disappear.
    I also have to believe that the TERRIBLE “discussions” in the professional journals can’t be doing much for the standing of those journals.

Leave a Reply