You Can’t Deny the Data Forever — Or Can You?

We just found what seems to be the ten billionth post by the Discovery Institute promoting the new book by Michael Behe. It’s rather obvious that in spite of their revolutionary “theory” of intelligent design, they don’t have anything else to talk about.

The last time we wrote about his book was Darwin’s Foolish Theory Is Ready To Shatter. In that post we omitted some familiar background material, so we’ll give it to you again:

Behe is a professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University, where he has tenure so he’s never been Expelled. His colleagues at Lehigh are so impressed by his brilliance that they publicly disassociated themselves from him by issuing this statement: Department Position on Evolution and “Intelligent Design”.

Most of you know about Behe’s performance in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, where he was the Discoveroids’ star witness. Judge John E. Jones wrote a splendid opinion for all to see, and utterly shredded Behe’s evidence — see Kitzmiller v. Dover: Michael Behe’s Testimony.

Okay, now let’s get to the Discoveroids’ new post. It’s titled Podcast with Michael Behe: “You Can’t Deny the Data Forever”, and it has no author’s by-line. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

On a new episode of ID the Future [Ooooooooooooh! A Discoveroid podcast!], host Eric Anderson interviews Michael Behe about Behe’s new book, A Mousetrap for Darwin [Amazon link].

Once again, they tell us what the book is all about:

Behe explains that he was spurred to build this collection of essays by a review in the journal Science claiming he had never answered his critics on key points. That annoyed Behe, because he had answered them, multiple times. A Mousetrap for Darwin compiles more than a hundred of his responses, some of them from difficult-to-access places. Download the podcast or listen to it here. [Link omitted!]

Nothing new yet. But then they say:

The book also contains fresh material from Dr. Behe [We shall assume it’s not from his underwear!], including some lively behind-the-scenes details about his interactions with colleagues and critics.

Wowie — behind-the-scenes interactions! The Discoveroids continue:

The Lehigh University biochemist addresses misconceptions about irreducible complexity [So does Wikipedia — see Irreducible complexity], responds to the claim that “molecular machines” is a misnomer, relates the surprising confessions some of his fellow biologists have made outside the spotlight about evolutionary theory [Gasp!], and offers his appraisal of why scientists in general don’t know what’s going on with studies in evolution or intelligent design.

Did you get that, dear reader? Behe explains why you don’t know what’s going on. Read the book — if you dare! And now we come to the end:

Behe remains optimistic, though. “You can’t deny the data forever,” he says.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! The continuing existence of the Discoveroids and other creationist outfits, along with astrology, flat Earth believers, Moon landing deniers, etc. shows that Behe is very wrong. Some people certainly can deny the data. And they do.

Copyright © 2020. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

14 responses to “You Can’t Deny the Data Forever — Or Can You?

  1. The resurrection of a great scientist.
    There 1000-page tome “Theistic Evolution” from 2017 has not a single line from Behe’s pen. He is just mentioned a few times, mostly in footnotes.
    Now he is back, the shining light of Intelligent Design.

  2. Michael Fugate

    Studies in intelligent design? Wouldn’t there need to be studies in intelligent design before anyone could possibly know what is going on?

    I am sure Behe’s “studies” provide evidence for God’s molecular machine factory staffed by what demigods, angels, djinn?

  3. Michael Fugate

    Behe claims his fellow biologists, in private of course, tell him evolution is wrong, but, then again, they don’t understand either evolution or intelligent design. So what good is the opinion of biologists, or chemists like Behe, who don’t know what they are talking about?

  4. Why oh why don’t we hear what the alternative is to evolution?

  5. Fellow biologists have told me in confidence…

    The lurkers support me in private …

    The silent majority…

    The windmills are falling…

    In other words, the DI’s usual cocktail. Two parts cracked idea, one part Holy Spirit, a shot of delusion, a dash of bitters, shake like the morning after, strain into a tall story and top with a wedge of document. Two of them are said to get a biochemist up on the bar in stilettos, yodelling “Give ’em the Old Razzle-Dazzle”, and swearing they’re a new paradigm, or maybe just paralytic. Sump’n like that, anyways. Set ’em up again, barkeep. Whoopee!

  6. It’s easy to ignore Behe’s “data.” To my knowledge, in his entire career as an “intelligent design” creationist Hehe Behe has not generated a single scrap of data. Not one iota. Not a jot. Zippo.

  7. Michael Fugate

    One can see the intelligent design powerhouse that Behe is here
    Evolution as Behe “understands” it cannot work, so a god did something, somehow, somewhere, and for some unknown reason. If a polar bear is a degenerate brown bear then whence a brown bear? I am looking for a book by Behe that doesn’t mention Darwin and evolution, but focuses only on the designer, designing, and manufacturing design. How are those molecular “machines” machined? Inquiring minds want to know.

  8. It isn’t a question of a lack of data. Rather, there is nothing that the data relate to.
    “If a theory claims to be able to explain some phenomenon but does not generate even an attempt at an explanation, then it should be banished.” Darwin’s Black Box, chapter 8, page 186,

  9. @MichaelF: “I am looking for a book by Behe that doesn’t mention Darwin and evolution, but focuses only on the designer, designing, and manufacturing design.”
    I’d be surprised if he managed to fill one entire page.

    @TomS: “there is nothing that the data relate to”
    And this is why.

  10. Michael Fugate

    Hans mentions their book that declares evolution and “true” Christianity at odds. The likes of Douglas Axe, Günter Bechley, Stephen Meyer, Casey Luskin, Matti Lesiola, James Tour, Jonathan Wells, Paul Nelson, Ola Hössjer, Colin Reeves and Ann Gauger claim not only is natural selection not creative, but common ancestry is fiction. They even find a Christian Pharmacy professor (now retired) willing to claim science is a religion, but back in the day when scientists were Christians – science wasn’t a religion. Everyone has to be religious, so if you aren’t a Christian, you must be practicing scientism.
    It is true Behe didn’t show up for this scientific, philosophic and theologic nightmare of idiocy and one wonders why.

  11. @Michael Fugate
    I haven’t kept up with Behe’s latest thought, but long ago, in “Darwin’s Black Box”, 1996, page 5, he wrote:
    “… I have no reason to doubt that the universe is the billions of years old that physicists say that it is. Further, I find the idea of common descent (that all organisms share a common ancestor) fairly convincing, and have no particular reason to doubt it.”

  12. Michael Fugate

    I would bet you couldn’t get a straight answer about what they believe.

  13. Theodore J Lawry

    The unintended irony is thick with this one. First Behe’s “you can’t ignore the data forever.” And now :
    Intelligent design mugs? We’ve got them. Yes, you do!

  14. Michael Fugate

    I would like to see the next review of Behe’s work to not involve refuting his claims about evolution, but to simply ask how intelligent design is an alternative. What is this intelligence thinking, planning and doing – what, how and why. We know he is wrong on evolution, but the burden is on him to state his replacement.