[balrog666]

More desperate dishonesty from the creationoids.

[Heartlander]

You are the result of stupidity or intelligence Balrog. You have picked your position and continue to argue accordingly…

[PatrickHenry]

PING. [This ping list is for the evolution side of evolution threads, and sometimes for other science topics. FReepmail me to be added or dropped.]

[realpatriot71]

More desperate dishonesty from the creationoids.

Did you even bother reading the article - by the by - Behe is NOT a creationist. He's an honest biochemist - few and far between these days.

[frgoff]

If you read Behe's book, you'll find that he has no hostility toward Darwinism and NeoDarwinism at all. He simply states that the current models cannot describe irreducibly complex systems.

Of course, this is a true statement, which is why there have been two types of responses to Behe: Calling him a nutcase, or trying to demonstrate that irreducible complexity does not exist in biological systems.

Behe's definition of irreducible complexity has remained consistent (read his book), and so far, the only way people have been able to prove one of his systems reducible is to change his working definition. A definition, by the way, which was NOT arbitrarily obtained. It is a definition that resulted from an OBSERVED weakness in the Darwinian model of natural selection.

Behe basically said: If a system X exists, it cannot have come about through natural selection. He then discovered numerous systems X. That's a point many people fail to recognize. It just isn't the flagellum. He also cites gated transport systems, mammalian blood clotting and a few others that escape me at the moment.

The reason that Behe publishes in the creationist papers and sites, is because they are the only ones that will accept his work, despite the fact that his theoretical models and arguments are sound and supported. I don't wonder that he's become slightly bitter toward the evolutionist crowd of late.

[betty boop]

More desperate dishonesty from the creationoids.

Well, my very dear balgog666, you are to be congratulated for your early display of sympathetic enthusiasm for the civilized and well-reasoned exchange of ideas -- this naturally human (and verifiably historical) endeavor designed to advance knowledge and understanding for public and private gain.

Of course I'm sure you already know that, in truth, you turned this thread into an Animal-House-style "food fight" right at Reply #2. Or at least made a sincere attempt.

I'm just catching up, and maybe never will. So don't know whether your wish came true or not.