Behe Again — Aaaargh!!

There’s no end to it. The continuing avalanche of posts about Michael Behe could only mean that the Discovery Institute has run out of things to talk about, so in a way this is good news. But wow — it’s Behe Behe Behe all the way down.

Anyway, the latest at the Discoveroids’ creationist blog is Behe: The Case for Intelligent Design Grows with Science, 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!], Michael Behe continues discussing A Mousetrap for Darwin [Link omitted!], his newest book.

We’ve posted about that book a zillion times already. The last one before this was You Can’t Deny the Data Forever — Or Can You? What else do the Discoveroids have to say? Here it comes:

Understanding of the cell has grown “by leaps and bounds” since the 1990s, when Behe’s first book appeared. Fresh discoveries have revealed ever more complex structures inside the cell. Download the podcast or listen to it here.

The podcast is sitting in the middle of the Discoveroids’ post. Go there and watch the thing if you want to. They continue:

As Behe explains, it isn’t just the bacterial flagellum that’s irreducibly complex; the “hook” region inside the flagellum is, too. [Ooooooooooooh! The hook!] Evolution’s proper place of study has moved from gross anatomy and population genetics to biochemistry.

Egad — the study of evolution is changing. Who knew? After that stunning disclosure they tell us:

In his conversation with host Eric Anderson, Behe says that intelligent design theory’s predictions are coming true over time

We interrupt the Discoveroids in the middle of their sentence for this Curmudgeonly reaction: BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Okay, Let’s keep reading the Discoveroid post where we left off:

while for every step of increasing knowledge, it gets “worse and worse” for the theory of evolution by undirected unintelligent processes.

Amazing, isn’t it? Darwinian evolution is a theory in the trash can, along with flat Earth, phlogiston, and all the other Superseded theories in science listed by Wikipedia. The Discoveroid post ends with this:

Purchase his latest book here. [Link omitted!]

How many more posts will it take before you’re finally motivated to buy Behe’s book? It seems that they’re determined to find out. We can’t wait for the next one!

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

9 responses to “Behe Again — Aaaargh!!

  1. The advocates of Intelligent Design continue to tell us how much life is far beyond what humans design.
    As if disanalogy is convincing.

  2. Michael Fugate

    This reminds me of a certain president and a certain recent election – evidence supports my victory, if we were ever to collect it…

  3. I don’t have the citation, but one of the judges said something to the effect of: you don’t have a claim of what happened and you don’t have any evidence that it happened.

  4. Michael Fugate

    Does sound like ID.

  5. “How many more posts will it take before you’re finally motivated to buy Behe’s book?”
    That’s a nice way to define infinity.

  6. It’s a sales pitch, nothing more. The only thing to be inferred from the repeats of the repeats is that the DI really wants to move this item. That might be because they’ve got a lot of stock on hand, or it might be because they’ve got a bigger mark-up on it. There’s no telling.

    One point is for sure, though: this “it’s too complicated to have evolved” schtick is getting kinda old.

  7. Michael Fugate

    Complexity is not necessarily evidence of design and especially efficient design. What we see in organisms is contingency due to common descent and relative fitness. An organism need only be good enough not perfect.

  8. @Michael Fugate
    What is design? What is evidence for design? What is the relationship between design and nature (matter, physics) or the supernatural (spirit, creation) or chance?

  9. @TomS: you could ask the same questions regarding complexity.