As someone who is not well-versed in microstructures, I cannot say much over Michael Behe's Irreducibly Complex thesis. However, I get the impression that this guy is okay with common descent, macroevolution, and the primate ancestry of man. Is it true? If true, is there any documentation on this? Ken Miller in
Finding Darwin's God wrote that once he confronted Behe about human evolution, and Behe dismissed Miller by saying that he has no problem with it himself and he accepts the mainstream explanation. Interesting character, isn't he?
Creationists love to use IC as their arsenal, but they did not realize (or maybe they did) that Behe
is, after all, a theistic evolutionist. The difference between him and Ken Miller is just over IC. Other creationists extrapolate IC into separate creation of each species or each kind (may vary according to each creationist's specifications), which I assume Behe rejects.
Therefore, why don't we delve into this matter further? Is it true that Michael Behe has no problem with organismal evolution, micro or macro?