Behe's Irreducible Complexity Is Refuted

quote:

---

Holmes will get a kick out of this too,

---

Heheheh... I actually got a bigger kick out of your link. I would have been impressed if Behe ended with "Thank you sir may I have another?" instead of his snivelling appeals that Miller's making a tie clip from a mousetrap shows the use of intelligence.As for Loudmouth's post, it is obviously discreditable. All Behe must do is appeal to the Wellsian argument that there is no way to know that any of those species were related and that those bones had those functions. After all the only thing we know is that we found bones which MAY have such relationships. What were we there or something?Gotta get that degree from the Institute one of these days!

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Yeah, but didn't you prove everything using intelligence? Certainly an intelligence must have made that image!(shreeeeeek!)

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Actually I was just kidding around with my comment, and sticking it to the inconsistency of the ID movement.It's true that Behe allows much for if not all of evolution. Even in Darwin's Blackbox he all but directly states that ID may only be applicable to abiogenesis and not evolution.I was struck by Behe's absurd recanting of his own position and logic in general (in MrH's link), to use the ridiculous "but you used intelligence to do that" argument against Miller.That's why I decided to lampoon him as a TRUE ID BELIEVER, who picks and chooses from each author despite their complete inconsistencies... if only to hold on to one more argument against evolution.My words may ring prophetic given a few more years, and a few more public spankings.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)