Hi Shadow,
Science will not even allow ID to present a theory.
I wil say it again; if Behe were to unambiguously submit his evidence for design to a major peer reviewed journal, they would jump at the chance. Nothing would please Behe's critics more than to publish his evidence. It would be hilarious.
Nothing is stopping Behe from publishing his evidence except for the fact that he hasn't really got any science to offer and he knows it.
It was admitted on this board that Behe was a qualified scientist. That his scienctific statements in re molecular findings have not been falsfied, but were questionable.
Not true. A number of Behe's claims have been falsified. His claim that the human blood clotting system was "irreducibly complex" was proven wrong for example, right in front of his face, at the Dover trial. His claim that the bacterial flagellum is irreducibly complex was likewise demolished. This doesn't seen to worry Behe or his supporters as much as one might hope it might, given that honest scientists are supposed to discard falsified notions.
Yet he presents a Theoretic opinion that there is based on his findings a Limit to what evolution can do, and he is rejected out of hand because he is not now able to prove his theory.
He is rejected because he cannot or will not (probably both) provide evidence for his theory. If you want to be taken seriously as a scientist, you have to do science. When it comes to ID, Behe refuses to play by the rules. He wants to rush straight ahead to pushing his junk science in the classroom, without ever having done the groundwork. No wonder he is rejected.
Einstenin could not prove his theory of relativity when he enuciated it, yet it has been accepted now by science.
But there is a huge difference. Einstein's ideas had
predictive power. They made predictions which could be tested against observation. Those observations matched the predictions, thus providing strong evidence for Einstein's hypothesis.
What predictive power does Behe's work give us? What observation would support or falsify his claims?
Your reply may be that Behe will never be able to prove his theory. I have read scientists who state that the theories of the Origin of life may never be proven.
A hypothesis about the origin of life can be tested. One can set up the experiment and attempt to replicate the event, to create new life. This may not demonstrate exactly how life
actually formed, but it at least tells us that it is possible in principle.
Behe doesn't even offer us this much. His claims cannot be tested or falsified. they have no predictive power. they have never been presented for peer review and they are clearly intended as religious apologetics. Are you really still wondering why he is not taken seriously?
Mutate and Survive
"A curious aspect of the theory of evolution is that everybody thinks he understands it." - Jacques Monod