[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Michael Behe who is a professor of biology at Pennsylvania Lehigh University. His concept of "irreducible complexity" proves the fallacy in Darwin's theory."

Behe has accepted

1) Common descent
2) Descent with modification
3) The old age of the earth
4) The designer may be dead
5) That science will have to be redefined to include the supernatural in order for ID to be scientific.

Also, *irreducible complexity* is a bastardization of an engineering concept called irreducible simplicity. Every *irreducibly complex* example Behe has presented has shown to NOT be IC. Such as the bacterial flagellum, the blood clotting system, and even the mouse trap. IC is an argument from incredulity. BTW, Darwin never recanted. :)

[conservative blonde]

IC may not work for you but I think Behe knows what he is talking about. I never indicated he didn't accept your 1 -5 items. So what does that prove? I suggested reading Behe to another person to give her a different view. I personally am not restricted with the precepts of ID. I am a Creationist. My whole premise is that since there is this much discussion about origins it simply shows there is lack of agreement and our public school children should be allowed to hear these different competing ideas as to origins. It is not right nor honest to tell them evolution is fact and there is no argument about it.