Replies

Don't you see how weak a position looks when it insists it's exempt from considering something because it doesn't comes from the journals? You might as well say the Pro-Life movement is just a few fringe people because you never see it on TV.

Straw man argument, try again. (Note that the length of the response is likely directly correlated to the quality. Funny that, eh?)

But, consider this: if Dembski publishes his work, even as poster paper at a scientific meeting, his work enters the mindset of some of the more brilliant minds in their fields. Now, Dembski's a pretty bright fella, I have no doubt, as his argument is fairly complex. But he's just one mind, and the field is large. If his ideas have merit, then you have the advantage of a multitude of people working on the same problem from different angles. But he's got to put it out there. He's no stranger to publishing, as his resume has about 3-4 published papers, so why doesn't he do it?

I read what the ID theorists had to say...Behe, Dembski, et al. I wouldn't presume to write to you if you were answering the issues they brought up. You're not. Insult me all you want. It won't change the fact you just aren't refuting these guys. When you write a paper disproving Dembski's math instead of relying on why the editor of your favorite journal thinks he's full of it, I'll start to believe you're not sticking your fingers in your ears and humming real loud.

Sounds like that is also what you are doing with respect to my question. I'm just a humble astronomer asking an interesting question to other humble people. While I have not read Dembski's books, I have read some of his published work on his websites, however, since you dislike long arguments (and frankly, I don't have the time to type in the book it would require), I'll pass for the moment. Perhaps after the Christmas season.