Behe Jumps the Shark [response to Michael Behe's NYTimes op-ed, "Design for Living"]

Butterflies and Wheels (reprinted from pharyngula.org) ^ | February 7, 2005 | P. Z. Myers

[qam1]

Yet today all of these are proposed for all peoples in the world and abortions number in the millions. It is this global tolerance and massive numbers which were initiated by the secularists and underpinned by evolutionist theocracy to which I refer.

What in Sam hill are you talking about? I can't think of anything more anti-evolution than abortion which is killing off your own genes. In evolution those who get their genes into the next generation "win", In terms of evolution aborting your child is gotta be the worst thing you can do.

And I don't know where you get you get that people need the Bible to be against abortion, The Bible is hardly Pro-Life

See

2 Kings 15:16
Then Menahem smote Tiphsah, and all that were therein, and the coasts thereof from Tirzah: because they opened not to him, therefore he smote it; and all the women therein that were with child he ripped up.

Hosea 13:16
Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.

Nice, Huh?

Plus it's apparent to God that fetus and children under 1 month aren't people

See

Numbers 3:15
Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them.

Now if God is so pro-life why wouldn't God count children under a month of age as people?

And again where God gives a monetary value on human life

Leviticus

27:3 And thy estimation shall be of the male from twenty years old even unto sixty years old, even thy estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary.

27:4 And if it be a female, then thy estimation shall be thirty shekels.

27:5 And if it be from five years old even unto twenty years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male twenty shekels, and for the female ten shekels.

27:6 And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver.

27:7 And if it be from sixty years old and above; if it be a male, then thy estimation shall be fifteen shekels, and for the female ten shekels.

Again, If the Bible tells us to be against abortion than why doesn't God give a value for fetuses and children under 1 month of age? Plus notice how God devalues old people.

Actually in one of life's great ironies, It's Science (via better & better ultrasounds) that so many Christians hate so much and not religion that is turning the tide against Abortion.

Here a nice article for you

A Secular Case Against Abortion

[qam1]

Yeah, that's right, join the left against the Christians.

If I wanted to join the left against Christians, I wouldn't be complaining about articles by con-man like Behe, I'd be out there encouraging more of them. Nothing hurts Conservatives as well as Christianity more than anti-science, let's go back to the dark ages people like Behe and if/when the left figures that out we will all be in big trouble.    

I love to see atheists join their proper crowd.

Good luck on that one, The election of Bill Clinton twice should have taught you that you fundies can not win elections by yourselves and there are a lot fewer of you now then there was then. Kick/Drive us out and you will never win an election again. And if you think the Pro-Evolution people on this board are hostile towards Christians just wait until Hillary gets to appoint judges. That unfortunately will be the inevitable results if  this insanity continues.

[gobucks]

"It's so irrelevant that any idiot could see that."

Maybe you are unto something. But, maybe you just not looking at what you don't want to see.

" [10] Loss and Remembering - Annie's funeral, affects of her death on the family, Darwin's memorial to Annie.

[11] The Destroying Angel - Analysis of the cause of Annie's death

[12] The Origin of Species - Darwin's loss of faith, publication of "Origin of Species", public reactions to the Origin.

From "Annie's Box: Charles Darwin, his Daughter, and Human Evolution "

From here: http://www.aboutdarwin.com/literature/Review.html

And this book, is from a Keynes ancestor .... you know, the econo dude the liberals love to love ....

[furball4paws]

I suppose you have one of these irrelevant stories about Alfred Russel Wallace, too and the many thousands of scientists since who have presented evidence for evolution (myself included).

Wake up man. 99.9% of the evidence for evolution is post Darwin. You only pick on Darwin the man because you cannot pick on the actual science. Would you beat on Wallace, if he had beaten Darwin into print? I am ready for your anti-Wallacism posts. I know you need a whipping boy, since it's easier to make things personal than to dispute fact with nothing.

Evolutionists don't pick on Behe on a personal basis, but based on his lack of science and own published word. If his mother had taken too many drugs while she was pregnant and created some chromosome abnormalities in him to make the intellectual monster that he is, it would not be mentioned here. It is irrlelvant.

I can personally guarantee you that evolution would be where it is right now with or without Darwin and possibly further along.

[Right Wing Professor]

I forgot to mention that if Mary Shelley had in fact witnessed any of E. Darwin's experiments she must've been a remarkable infant, because E. Darwin died when Mrs. Shelley was 4 years old.....

Figures. Gobucks' superior moral code evidently permits him simply to make things up when convenient. I've caught him at this several times.

[balrog666]

Good luck on that one, The election of Bill Clinton twice should have taught you that you fundies can not win elections by yourselves and there are a lot fewer of you now then there was then. Kick/Drive us out and you will never win an election again. And if you think the Pro-Evolution people on this board are hostile towards Christians just wait until Hillary gets to appoint judges. That unfortunately will be the inevitable results if this insanity continues.

They don't care. They would gladly bring our entire civilization crashing down upon our heads if it would also mean the end of that evil, twisted science bugaboo, evolution.

[Long Cut]

Someone needs to write up a list of every creationist shill on here who has been caught in the act of willful, continuous lying.

By that I mean those who 1) Continue to quote or reference discredited, debunked sources which have been pointed out to them; 2) Repeat falsehoods which have been proven to be lies without any acknowlegement of their mendacity; 3) refuse to correct any misstatements, but defend the lies as if true; and 4) repeatedly make up "facts" out of whole cloth, as well as lie about other posters ("All Evo's are atheists/homos/communists/ etc...).

Post this list with every thread, so that the lurkers can know full well how to regard the posts of those people.

I can think offhand of about a half-dozen confirmed liars who keep spouting their BS here.

[furball4paws]

I think that might violoate the rules around here, but if it was possible and you could include the criterion of "hopelessness" (a real tough one), I might like to see the list. Some spout mush and when called on it, just quietly go away for awhile. There may be some hope for these.

[bvw]

Have any of your friends, known parents and grandparents and known relatives killed a child?

I mean you claim -- by that cobbled article -- that 10% to 15% of children are murdered. Does that number seem at all reasonable to you?

[Long Cut]

There ARE some who come onto these threads and offer decent arguments and discussion, and some who genuinely come to be informed and make an educated descision about the subject matter. They are commonly upfront and honest, and make all effort to correct mistakes and errors. Both Alamo-Girl and BettyBoop come to mind as two superior people in this regard.

However, there are some whose only purpose seems to be to spread lies and propaganda, or to toss one-post stinkbombs.

[bvw]

It's the "scientists" that hate science they find less than pythagoreanly pure that I find a problem with. If you would argue that such scientific purists haven't favored abortion and sterlization then you might be unfamiliar with the eugenics movement, with Sanger, with Singer.

Or even that recent case of a Professor of Science at Villanova -- who opted her downs sydrome baby out, and then herself too.

[PatrickHenry]

Someone needs to write up a list of every creationist shill on here who has been caught in the act of willful, continuous lying.

I've been giving this some thought. It might be simpler to list the creationists who don't lie. They do exist, but they are few. We could keep a short list of "righteous creationists."

What I've been think about is how to handle the "chronic insulters." Those who routinely spew their venomous fantasies that the science-oriented freepers are leftists, homos, god-haters, etc. We don't sling insults the way they do. At most, some call them liars, but that's about as strong as it gets. More is deserved, but we like to adhere to Robinson's posting guidelines. The hard-core creationists really don't care about that, or much else.

[longshadow]

chronic placemarker

[Dimensio]

It fits the evidence!

What kind of observation would be inconsistent with ID?

[WildTurkey]

It sounds impressive, but I've read several articles by Behe, and they make excellent sense. I say that not from a religious perspective but as someone with an interest in science.

You may be "interested" in science but I doubt it. Anyone interested in science would use valid sources, not Behe's false propaganda.

[Dimensio]

Many computer programmers do commit irresponsible complexity.

Hey! It works and that's all that matters!

[furball4paws]

"Both Alamo-Girl and BettyBoop come to mind as two superior people in this regard."

I'll buy these two, although Alamo-Girl sometimes leaves me scratching my head - she's never nasty.

[bvw]

Would you be speaking to Mr. W. Turkey, then?

[PatrickHenry]

Further thought: the category of "righteous creationists" (which doesn't mean self-righteous creationists) actually includes two groups, those who are genuinely thoughtful, and those who are consistently clueless, but not malicious.

[SuzyQue]

"Numbers 3:15
Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them.

Now if God is so pro-life why wouldn't God count children under a month of age as people?

Not to address your argument in general but just to answer this one question - infants under 1 month were very apt to die, so they were not counted until they had made it for a month. Not that they weren't considered people before then.