pangloss

edit

DNAunion

DNAunion: What, not one of the hard-core anti-Behe-ians is going to try to "refute" me on this?

I guess I should take the absolute silence from you guys as an implicit acknowledgement of the correctness of my statements. I am glad that you have all come to concede the point to me.

pz

Why bother? Your obtuseness on this matter is self-evident, so there's little point.

Doubting Didymus

DNA: it is a thread on a completely different board. If you feel the contents of that thread are relevant here, you may make your case in the form of a post. I hate debates which are carried out half on one board, and half on the other with constant quoting/responding to other posts on different boards. If you want your case in favour of behe discussed here, make it here.

Doubting Didymus

Having just clicked on the link, I am incredulous that you expected someone to reply to it. There are three full pages of just you, responding to someone, who is responding in turn to someone else. You expect someone from here, to go over there, take your agument (it must be tens of tousands of words), break it into quotes, and repond to it here? Such a mammoth effort would certainly require a new thread.

DNAunion

DNAunion: It is ME responding to MULTIPLE PEOPLE who raised (what they incorrectly thought were) reasons my original statements were incorrect.

Tell you what. One key concept can be found in posts #5 and #6, where I lay out the concept of the actual IC system being the IC core of the whole system. It is the inability of people like Ken Miller (and Lucaspa) to grasp this point that leads them astray. Does anyone disagree with my statements in just those two posts?

Principia

Yup. Defending Behe against "misrepresentations," repeating Behe's claims over and over, and professing to be a champion of truth all do nothing to deter from the fact that Behe's thesis is completely irrelevant to biology as a discipline. Want proof? Let's just check the pubmed searches for "Behe, irreducible complexity" -- 0... for "irreducible complexity" -- 6 (none of which deal with Behe)... for "Behe, intelligent design" -- 0. This 6-7 years after the publishing of DBB! On the other hand, a single issue of JME or Evolution or JTB overhelms these numbers hands down.

pz

Not to Behe. He's the guy who has been going around for years claiming that JME hasn't published a single article on the evolution of complex molecular structures...which is yet another indicator of how far the guy will go in denying the obvious. Like DNAUnion, the man is out of touch with reality.

Principia

Ah, but it's these urban myths that sustains Behe as a martyr-figure for iconoclasts... especially those who would channel all of their energy towards championing Behe's cause for the sake of Behe. Hmm... let's see when was the last thing of substance that Behe wrote on behalf of his IC thesis... Be back with the summary (short, to be sure).

Doubting Didymus

I don't care. My point is that it is nothing at all to do with the IIDB, or any of the posters here.

Did you not read my post? If anyone wants to respond to your points made on christianforums, they may go to christianforums to do so. If you want people HERE to respond to them, make your case here. When you do, please do not refer to other posts that were also not made here. I am simply requesting that the topics that are here and on CF be kept where they were started.