Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Topic

Michael Behe

Uploaded: By Design: Behe, Lennox, and Meyer on the Evidence for a Creator

Hoover Institution: “Michael Behe, John Lennox, and Steven Meyer are three of the leading voices in science and academia on the case for an intelligent designer of the universe and everything in it (including us). Read More ›

At Evolution News: Michael Behe in World Magazine — “Game Over” for Darwinism

"...the game is over for Darwinian evolutionary theory: an unguided evolutionary explanation for what Behe calls irreducibly complex structures, including ATP synthase, will not be found." Read More ›

Asked at Evolution News: How much can evolution really accomplish?

Anderson: "The deeply held assumption of nearly all evolutionists is that evolution can do everything. After all, we’re here aren’t we! So there is little point in even asking the question." Actually, in religious circles, if anyone treated their sect’s creed the way Darwinians have treated evolution, they would be regarded as a cult. Read More ›

Two new papers support Michael Behe’s thesis in Darwin Devolves

The thesis is that much evolution consists in dumping rather than adding complexity. Details, details. Subtraction is just addition with minus numbers, right? ;) Would it be legal to teach Darwin Devolves in a U.S. school system? Read More ›

New Video Presentation on YouTube: Intelligent Design & Scientific Conservatism

I have recently posted a new video on my Intelligent Design YouTube channel. In this video I discuss several areas in the philosophy of science and modern evolutionary biology, and their relationship to ID. These thoughts were prompted initially by an interesting paper by philosopher of science Jeffrey Koperski ‘Two Bad Ways to Attack Intelligent Design, and Two Good Ones’. Koperski thinks that one good way to critique ID is to point out that it violates principles like ‘scientific conservatism’. Because there are several potential naturalistic mechanisms on the table, even if orthodox neo-Darwinism fails, ID is an unnecessary proposal. To turn to design explanations would be to adjust our theories too drastically. I argue against this claim, concluding that Read More ›

At Mind Matters News: Non-materialist science is wanted — dead or alive

Michael Egnor: I’ve gotten calls to my department in my university demanding that I be fired. That’s a fairly frequent thing. I was called a couple of years ago by the campus police that there was a death threat against me and they wanted to protect me. So this kind of stuff goes on. And some of these people are vicious. Read More ›

Ten (or so) Pro-Intelligent Design Books You Should Read

On the Design Disquisitions YouTube channel, I’ve posted a new video where I recommend several books of interest, specifically pro-ID literature. Most of the suggestions may be familiar to you, but hopefully there are a few that you’ve not read before. I also give a brief summary of the content of each book. I don’t claim that the books mentioned are necessarily the best, but I think anyone who wants to join the discussion needs to be familiar with some of these. Let me know what you would add to the list! Ten (or so) Pro-Intelligent Design Books You Should Read

Grand Darwinian experiment with 10,000 generations of yeast proves that Mike Behe is right

If the authors could have predicted adaptation through loss-of-function mutations, why didn’t they let high school textbook authors and pop science presenters in on the secret?: Michael Behe is right: Darwin devolves. Evolution is mostly about devolution. Does that maybe make sense in a universe where entropy is growing? But where does it leave Darwin? At the bus stop after the last bus has left? Read More ›

Some thoughts from a reader on Behe’s vindication at Lehigh

Remember, these same authors wrote a scathing review of Darwin Devolves in the journal Evolution. Now, somehow, they must hold their position of opposing Darwin Devolves, while presenting compelling evidence to support Darwin Devolves. Quite a conundrum! Read More ›

Behe vindicated (still not cited) at his own LeHigh University

One might ask: If things go downhill that way and “directionality and progress in evolution may be illusory,” what is the source of intelligent designs? An intelligence in or beyond nature? We’ll take either as an answer, to start a discussion. Read More ›