[megatherium]

Darwin won't have the opportunity to testify, but Kenneth Miller I believe did. Miller wrote a fine book, Finding Darwin's God, offering arguments as to why intelligent design is poor theology as well as poor science. Miller, as is Behe, is a Roman Catholic.

So we won't get to see Behe debate Darwin, but on C-SPAN they were showing a terrific debate between Behe and Miller.

I happen to come down on the Miller side of this debate; I think ID is bad science that does not belong in high school classrooms. But nor do I think ID can be dismissed out-of-hand; it and its proponents deserve to be debated in a respectful manner. My more vociferous (and less informed) pro-evolutionist friends and colleagues seem to think ID is just young-Earth creationism in drag, and their polemics reflect that supposition. I have, well, bothered them by carefully arguing that ID is nothing of the kind.

[samtheman]

I happen to come down on the Miller side of this debate; I think ID is bad science that does not belong in high school classrooms. But nor do I think ID can be dismissed out-of-hand; it and its proponents deserve to be debated in a respectful manner. My more vociferous (and less informed) pro-evolutionist friends and colleagues seem to think ID is just young-Earth creationism in drag, and their polemics reflect that supposition. I have, well, bothered them by carefully arguing that ID is nothing of the kind.

I agree. I also believe that ID is bad science but that it is sincerely put forward and raises questions that are worthy of debate.