Ya know DNAunion, in all the years I've been reading your posts (here, IIDB), this is the first time I've ever seen you make a definitive statement of where you're coming from. I hereby officially and formally renounce any lingering doubts I may have had about you. Thanks for (finally) clarifying what you're on about.
Now - given that your argument consists not of
defending Behe and ID, what would you consider to be a
valid argument against what I usually construe as Behe's highly intricate "god of the gaps" and/or personal incredulity argument? IOW, what would be a good approach to take to refute/rebut his arguments?
™ Version 4.2