Posted on 01/02/2009 5:04:12 PM PST by Coyoteman
One of the enduring fantasies of the intelligent design (ID) movement is the notion that it might have won the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial if it hadn’t been consistently “misrepresented” in testimony by witnesses from the scientific establishment. Even worse, they point out, when their own heroes like Scott Minnich and Michael Behe attempted to correct those Darwinist distortions, Judge Jones, that liberal, ACLU-friendly activist, paid no attention.
More than three years after Kitzmiller v. Dover, Discovery Institute spokesman Casey Luskin is still trying to win the case. During the trial itself, from which Discovery stalwarts William Dembski and Steven Meyer conspicuously withdrew, Luskin stood just outside the courtroom, spinning the day’s testimony for any reporter willing to listen. Casey’s still spinning, and now he’s doing his manful best to resurrect one of Behe’s favorite arguments for “irreducible complexity” (IC), the vertebrate blood clotting cascade. The culprit in its demise at the Dover trial, of course, was me. But according to Casey, my testimony was nothing more than “Smoke-and-Mirrors.”
Continues...
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.discovermagazine.com ...
Coyoteman...the other Soliton.
Off with their heads!
I'm curious; what exactly is your objection to me or my post?
There are so few scientists left here, surely you don't begrudge us a few posts?
Do you suppose that will be the last we hear of the clotting cascade as “irreducibly complex”, or has it already joined the pantheon of ever repeated (even though totally discredited) creationist “arguments”?
Interesting piece. Always like reading Miller: whip-smart guy, and as a devout Catholic he doesn’t misuse science as a springboard to attacking believers.
Beyond the scientific objections, it seems to me that ID implies a rather weird and comical theology, imputing indecisiveness or fidgetyness to God, Who (supposedly) sometimes allows evolution to do the work, and sometimes does it Himself. Maybe I’m too austere a Methodist, but an image of a lackadaisical God, One Who likes to putter about a bit, then seemingly loses interest and wanders off, seems to me irreverent and perhaps absurd. I wouldn’t say sinful... but really, really strange.
tap, tap. tap. tap.
I am a scientist. What you are doing is not scientific.
You are correct; I do not do science in internet chat rooms. Science is conducted in the technical journals, conferences, and the like.
But I can offer corrections to those here who abuse science. There are certainly enough folks who are offering their uninformed opinions that there should be no objection when a few scientists reply.
Have I entered an alternative reality where words have completely different meanings?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.