It appears that Behe is being a very effective witness when one of the plaintiffs' attorneys mentions the in-depth nature of Behe's testimony. Muise's response was great.
As I said earlier on a few occasions, one needs to wait for the defense to present their case before getting too excited about the plaintiff case.
ROFL! Okay, you keep believing that if you want to, and you obviously want to very much. The cross-examination is going to shred Behe. He can wave his hands all he wants and try the old "baffle 'em with BS" technique, but the cross-examination will have no problem cutting to the chase and demolishing this nonsense from Behe, which makes all of Behe's charts about biology completely moot:
Miller was wrong when he said that intelligent design proponents don't have evidence to support intelligent design so they degrade the theory of evolution, Behe said.The problem for Behe is that all of his hand-waving about biochemical systems is being done in order to try to argue, "gosh, this sure is complex, I personally don't think it could have evolved, therefore it must have been designed." And this is exactly what Miller was (correctly) saying about the "ID" case. Behe and the other IDers keep making the elementary logical fallacy of the False Dichtomy -- they keep making the simplistic and incorrect mistake of thinking that there are only two possible explanations, and that if evolution can be (allegedly) ruled out, then ID "must" be correct by default.
Unfortunately, it just doesn't work that way. Evidence *against* evolution is not evidence *for* ID (or any other particular alternative explanation). And Behe has never, ever, ever given actual evidence which directly supports ID itself -- he has always attempted to just undermine evolutionary biology.
Furthermore, even his arguments "against" evolutionary biology are fundamentally flawed, and it shouldn't be hard at all to show that to the court as well.
"ID" is an empty shell, consisting of misrepresentations, propaganda, and outright deceptions.
As I said earlier on a few occasions, one needs to wait for the defense to present their case before getting too excited about the plaintiff case.
And as we've said on several occasions, Behe is coming to the trial with a busted flush, and if this is ID's "star witness", it's in big trouble. For example, here's part of an earlier reply of mine to you when you had previously pinned your hopes on him coming to save the day for ID:
When does Behe take the stand? For me, these earlier witnesses aren't contributing much. The cross examination of Behe should be very interesting.Yes it should be very interesting, since Behe is an idiot, who can't even get trivial basics of biology correct, and his arguments are fatally flawed.
It does not speak well for the "ID movement" that it reveres such clowns as their "big guns".