[Rudder]

During the trial in Dover, Pa. Behe could not defend ireducible complexity. He resorted to testifying: 'you can tell if it's irreducible by the intentional purpose of the design.'

That's circular, gobidleygook sophistry.

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>During the trial in Dover, Pa. Behe could not defend ireducible complexity. He resorted to testifying: 'you can tell if it's irreducible by the intentional purpose of the design.'<<<

I wonder how would one defend evolution against the 1970 study of the Galapagos finches?