The ID Fallacy

i think the other problem is that it's two stacked fallacies that operate like logic.the first is basically an argument from icredulity:
"i don't believe evolution could do this! it's impossible!"the second is an argument from ignorance:
"i don't know what could have made this, therefor god did it."fact is that neither holds up. there are other methods besides the strictest form of darwinian evolution. if you show for instance that simple successive modification doesn't work, then there are other options that happen on their own within multiple steps of simple successive modification: co-option, scaffolding, etc.just because behe doesn't realize that these things happen in any evolutionary system doesn't mean the biologists (and computer scientists) don't. behe's ignorance of the field is not an argument. it's ignorance.

---

אָרַח

behe's guilty of something similar. he claims that darwin's theory is a magical "black box" -- something that you put something into, and get something else out of without knowing how it works. but we know how darwinian evolution works. behe presents a "black box" explanation. he doesn't propose how something is intelligently designed -- he provides no mechanism.the explanation is doesn't explain anything.

---

אָרַח