In doing some research on a post about one of Behe’s papers, I came across this little gem. Back in 2004, around the time he and David Snoke published their paper in Protein Science, William Dembski announced at DDDV that this paper “may well be the nail in the coffin [and] the crumbling of the Berlin wall of Darwinian evolution.” Here is Behe in a reply to Michael Lynch’s response to that paper:
It sometimes happens in science that there is a marked difference between the stories people tell about the implications of a work and the actual details of the work. Some people have made great hay about the implications of our article. We subscribe neither to triumphant views in some circles that our paper disproved Darwinism, nor to overwrought ones that it supports some grand anti-science conspiracy.
I wonder if Behe has told Dembski to stop saying that his paper is the “nail in the coffin” of evolution, or told the DI to stop crowing about it as a paper that supports ID? It doesn’t, of course; it actually strongly supports evolution and argues against irreducible complexity.