In a follow-up to his post on Behe's conduct as a scientist (which I discuss here), Steve Matheson has now posted the second part of his critique, this time examining Behe's "scientific" arguments regarding malaria. There will be a part IIb in the future.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Steve Matheson over at Quintessence of Dust has posted part IIb of his "Why I'm not a fan of Behe" series, this time covering Behe's abuse of genetics. I've referred to previous posts in this series here and here. Steve ends with:
In summary, I find Behe's handling of genetics in EoE to be…
Over at Quintessence of Dust, Steve Matheson raises some good points about Behe. Steve's argument boils down to the following:
"Behe's fans say that he's a nice guy, and that the evolutionists are "crucifying" him. Both claims seem to be true, but they can't hide some serious problems with his…
Just a quick follow-up to the previous post, as I finished watching the whole Behe-McWhorter exchange. Notes:
1) McWhorter is an atheist, and implies he's always been an atheist (or at least not a theist).
2) He's really impressed by Michael Behe's arguments, to the point where he might assent to…
Ronald Reagan famously defined the eleventh commandment to be, “Thou shalt not criticize a fellow Republican.” I'm a big fan of the spirit, if not the substance, of that statement. Generally speaking, I try to avoid criticizing my own side. The way I see it, there are dozens of bloggable items…
Ouch! That's got to leave a mark on Behe! Matheson's critique is so clear that even I, a non-professional, can understand it. Thanks for the links.