Posted on 10/18/2005 9:31:08 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
The Harrisburg courtroom was packed yesterday with reporters and members of the public who came to see the second half of Dover's intelligent design trial.
The defense began presenting its case by calling its star witness -- Lehigh University professor, biochemist and top intelligent design scientist Michael Behe.
Thomas More Law Center attorney Robert Muise started the questioning in a simple format, asking, for example, if Behe had an opinion about whether intelligent design is creationism. Then he asked Behe to explain why.
Behe said intelligent design is not creationism, but
a scientific theory that makes scientific claims that can be tested for accuracy.
Behe testified that intelligent designdoesn't require a supernatural creator, but an intelligent designer: it does not name the designer.
He said evolution is not a fact and there are gaps in the theory that can be explained by intelligent design.
There is evidence that some living things were purposefully arranged by a designer, Behe claimed in his testimony.
Gave examples: One example is the bacterial flagellum, the tail of a bacteria that quickly rotates like an outboard motor, he said.
The bacterial flagellum could not have slowly evolved piece by piece as Charles Darwin posited because if even one part of the bacteria is removed, it no longer serves its original function, Behe said.
Biologist and Brown University professor Kenneth Miller testified for the parents about two weeks ago. He showed the courtroom diagrams on a large screen, detailing how the bacterial flagellum could be reduced and still work.
Also showing diagrams, Behe said Miller was mistaken and used much of his testimony in an attempt to debunk Miller's testimony.
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.
But Behe also said evolution fails to answer questions about the transcription on DNA, the "structure and function of ribosomes," new protein interactions and the human immune system, among others.
By late in the afternoon, Behe was supporting his arguments with complex, detailed charts, at one point citing a scientific article titled "The Evolved Galactosidase System as a Model for Studying Acquisitive Evolution in the Laboratory."
Most of the pens in the jury box -- where the media is stationed in the absence of a jury -- stopped moving. Some members of the public had quizzical expressions on their faces.
One of the parents' attorneys made mention of the in-depth subject matter, causing Muise to draw reference to Miller's earlier testimony.
He said the courtroom went from "Biology 101" to "Advanced Biology."
"This is what you get," Muise said.
Board responds: Randy Tomasacci, a schoolboard member with a Luzerne County school district, said he was impressed with Behe's testimony.
Tomasacci represents Northwest Area School District in Shickshinny, a board that is watching the Dover trial and is contemplating adopting an intelligent design policy.
"We're going to see what happens in this case," he said.
Some of his fellow board members are afraid of getting sued, Tomasacci said.
Tomasacci's friend, Lynn Appleman, said he supports Dover's school board.
He said he thought Behe was "doing a good job" during testimony, but "it can get over my head pretty quick."
Former professor Gene Chavez, a Harrisburg resident, said he came to watch part of the proceedings because the case is "monumental."
He said he had doubts about the effectiveness of Behe's testimony.
"I think he's going to have a hard time supporting what he has concluded," Chavez said. "I think he is using his science background to make a religious leap because it's what he believes."
I would agree that ID requires some sort of supernatural cause. Personally, I believe that cause is the God of the Bible. Others on the ID side would argue that the 'designer' is not known.
The evolutionist has a similar problem. Just as some IDers claim they don't know the identity of the 'designer', the evolutionists does not even attempt to explain the origin of life.
If the evolutionists cannot identify the force behind the origination of life, it is unreasonable to expect the non-Christian IDer to identify the 'designer'.
The evolutionist who claims the origin of life has nothing to do with evolution is being at least as disingenuous as any IDer who claims that the designer is unknown.
Based on the comments of some of the evolutionists on these threads, some evolutionists concede that the origin of life could have a supernatural cause. Is the belief in the existence of an intelligent designer really any different?
I just think it would be typical of this clown act if they argued they had the right to reprsent a significan religious group in the science classroom. That is, after all, the written policy of the Discovery Institute.
I noticed on another thread that DI has filed a brief in this case asking the court to consider the opinion of 85 DI approved scientists. That ought to go over well, considering that DI is on record opposing empiricism.
;->
I sat on that troll the last time I visited Seattle. Cool!
LOL!!!!
Context determines meaning. Miller's speculations about as-yet undiscovered indirect Darwinian pathways where a system evolves by also modifying its function is irrelevent to Behe's points concerning DIRECT Darwinian pathways. From that same exchange:
MB:
I said, I said that the function of the system is missing. I'm happy to admit that similar proteins can have other functions in the cell, but the system loses its function.
Cordially,
What's the point spread?
No. But it's still not science. Cover it in religion class.
I've been playing on thesee threads for several years, and I know from observation that there are only two issues that concern most freepers -- common descent and the age of the earth.
The really odd thing is that the star witness for the defense agrees with mainstream science on both of these issues.
I have been asking for a couple months now and have not been able to get a single freeper ID advocate to agree with Behe on these two points.
"" "Neither the constitutive nor the inducible evolved strains grew on lactose in the absence of IPTG." ""
As a microbiologist/biochemist I have spent quite awhile trying to make sense from this. I assume it is a quote and is accurate because of the "", but who knows.
I think it means this:
"Neither constitutive beta-galactosidase nor inducible beta-galactosidase strains grew on lactose as carbon and energy source in the absence of isopropyl-beta-D-galactopyranoside."
If that's true, what does this have to do with ID?
Anybody got a better take on this?
I wonder if God reads FR? I'm sure He'd get a kick out of all this.
Damn!, I left out the "thio". NBD.
I have a feeling that when God cooked up the Earth and all its inhabitants in his kitchen that he took it out of the oven early and it's half-baked.
Unclear. What is apparent is that the Troll likes to eat Farvegnugens; there's a real one in his hand!
The Creator of our universe has revealed the truth regarding your question in His message. A non-linear Creator must be outside our time domain. Your linear attempts to define that which is eternal, reveal that modern physics has gone over your head.
Isa 57:15 For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity,
Only the one who has the power to create the universe, and supernaturally resurrect from the dead can make the below claim truthfully.
Isa 43:10 Ye [are] my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I [am] he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.
Remember, a majority of the most honorable people of the last 2000 years, dedicated their lives to serving Jesus Christ.
I remember that. I once asked a German friend of mine what it meant and he looked at me like I had a third growing out of my forehead.
There goes the neighborhood placemarker.
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.