Oh, you can't see the difference between the two statements. Perhaps you need to take a walk and get some oxygen circulating through that thing between your ears. He's talking about YOU.
You aren't wrankled about ID establishing a religion. It doesn't do that and comes nowhere near it. It simply posits that there is an intelligence behind our matierial existance.
You see that and read "God". Then suddenly, you go nuts.
You're so dead set against "God" that any hint that there might be one is reason for protesting against something - anything. Behe is just saying that you should shut up and allow that the possibility exists that Religion is right and you might be wrong. And he does it dispassionately while you're all out of sorts. His stance is just honesty from objectivity. Yours is rabid protest from bias. You can't allow yourself to imagine that a God could exist. Behe doesn't have a problem with it. As a result, he's not ruling out the impact it might have on his research.
Go take a walk. Breathe deeply.
No, I can't see the consistency between the two statements. I certainly see the difference. Do you have any other tricks besides being shifty and slippery?
You aren't wrankled about ID establishing a religion.
Or even rankled. But I'm not fooled by ID either.
Go take a walk. Breathe deeply.
I don't need to do either to see through your obfuscations.