Posted on 10/16/2005 1:28:00 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
Marginalized by his university colleagues, ridiculed as a quack by the scientific establishment, Michael Behe continues to challenge the traditional theory of how the world came to be.
For more than a decade, the tenured Lehigh University biochemistry professor and author has been one of the nation's leading proponents of intelligent design, a movement trying to alter how Darwin's theory of evolution is taught in school.
This week, Behe will testify in a federal courtroom in Harrisburg in a landmark case about whether students in a Pennsylvania classroom should be required to hear a statement before their evolution classes that says Darwin's theory is not a fact.
"The fact that most biology texts act more as cheerleaders for Darwin's theory rather than trying to develop the critical faculties of their students shows the need, I think, for such statements," Behe said.
In papers, speeches and a 1996 best-selling book called "Darwin's Black Box," Behe argues that Darwinian evolution cannot fully explain the biological complexities of life, suggesting the work of an intelligent force.
His life on the academic fringes can be lonely. Critics say the concept is nothing more than biblical creationism in disguise. He long ago stopped applying for grants and trying to get his work published in mainstream scientific journals. In August, his department posted a Web statement saying the concept is not scientific.
"For us, Dr. Behe's position is simply not science. It is not grounded in science and should not be treated as science," said Neal Simon, the biology department chairman.
Behe said he was a believer in Darwin when he joined Lehigh in 1985, but became a skeptic after reading Michael Denton's book "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis."
Behe's big idea, published in "Darwin's Black Box" and the one that catapulted him to academic fame, is irreducible complexity. It is the notion that certain biochemical systems are incapable of having evolved in Darwinian fashion because they require all of their parts working simultaneously.
Behe uses a mousetrap to illustrate the concept. Take away any of its parts - platform, spring, hammer, catch - and the mousetrap can't catch mice.
"Intelligent design becomes apparent when you see a system that has a number of parts and you see the parts are interacting to perform a function," he said.
The book "put the positive case for design on the map in a way that some of the (previous intelligent design) work had not done," said Steven Meyer, director of the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute [http://www.discovery.org]. Most of academia panned it.
Eugenie Scott, director of the National Center for Science Education [ http://www.ncseweb.org], said that he believes Behe thought he discovered something astonishing. "But no one is using irreducible complexity as a research strategy, and with very good reason ... because it's completely fruitless," he said.
Behe finds community in a Web group that he says includes like-minded faculty from other universities. Most keep their views to themselves, Behe said, because "it's dangerous to your career to be identified as an ID proponent."
He earned tenure at Lehigh before becoming a proponent, which lets him express his views without the threat of losing his job.
"Because of the immense publicity that's mushroomed around this issue in the past six months, more people are getting emotional about the topic," Behe said. "And it's generally not on my side."
Huh? What about Britney Spears? /sarc
And Adam answered, "It's not the fig leaf, dear."
Thus began the war of the sexes.
"Makes me wonder what some of these folks who take the Bible "literally" (which to me is superficially), would have done with any of Jesus' wonderful parables. Instead of getting THE POINT, they'd be arguing about the existence of a vineyard where the owner paid those who started at dawn, noon and near dusk the same pay...(one of my personal favorites)."
Either Christ is wrong or Darwin is wrong.
Which one is it?
Christ is wrong. (...that is assuming he even existed, that he said this, that he meant it to be a historical statement, that the people who heard it accurately passed it on to those who wrote it down, and that it is being interpreted by you in the manner intended.)
Ah now PH - he started it.
I did not!
Did too.
Isn't polygamy only practiced by religious groups? In North America at least? And where are the groups practicing polyandry or polygynomy?
Or how about polylaundry?
Ah, but Hitler thought his race was created by God to be the superior race. Not a point against Darwin at all.
At least in this country it's polygon.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA!
Yep.
"Festival of the Insane Trolls" placemarker
*** Christ is wrong.***
Vey bold. But that's your choice.
"The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day."
- Jesus, John 12
Expand a few pixels from John 3, and the whole "love thy neighbor" thing is out of the picture. It's so messy and time consuming, and it's unnecessary when faith give you a get out of jail free card.
Still working on the Lucy fossils?
or cleaning out the garage...
***Didn't Jesus use the parable periodically as a means of making a point?***
He did. At it is almost always prefaced with something like, "And he spoke a parable unto them, saying..."
But in the case at hand he is clearly making reference to the historical account of Genesis an not making a parable.
No bias here. Oh well, just spell the name right.
This week, Behe will testify in a federal courtroom in Harrisburg in a landmark case
Excellent.
"The fact that most biology texts act more as cheerleaders for Darwin's theory rather than trying to develop the critical faculties of their students shows the need, I think, for such statements," Behe said.
Excellent. I'm surprised the editors let this slip through.
"For us, Dr. Behe's position is simply not science. It is not grounded in science and should not be treated as science," said Neal Simon, the biology department chairman.
MSM SOP.
Behe said he was a believer in Darwin when he joined Lehigh in 1985, but became a skeptic after reading Michael Denton's book "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis."
Excellent. Someone in Wichita will now pick up Denton's book.
Overall, every newspaper mention of ID, no matter how slanted, represents a victory for the ID movement.
No, that's not implicit. Evolution only "cares" about adaptation, and an organism can adapt by cooperating with other individuals or other species as well as by "struggling" against them. Sure, agonistic strategies are often produced by evolution, but so are cooperative ones. And "struggle" is not a good in and of itself as the Nazis thought. It is only adaptive or maladaptive ("good" or "bad") in the context of some specific environment.
Again, the Nazis appealed to a cartoon version of evolution. If you engage in guilt by association at that low level, then any doctrine is vulnerable; including Christianity, cartoon versions of which are practiced by racist groups TODAY (not 60 years ago) by groups such as the Christian Identity sects.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.