Interesting. Is that an internet rumor?
I can't seem to find the direct quote anywhere.
I'll keep looking.
Interesting. Is that an internet rumor?
No.
Eric Rothschild, an attorney for the plaintiffs, is cross-examining Dr. Behe:
Q: Under that same definition astrology is a scientific theory under your definition, correct?
A: Under my definition, a scientific theory is a proposed explanation which focuses or points to physical, observable data and logical inferences. There are many things throughout the history of science which we now think to be incorrect which nonetheless would fit that -- which would fit that definition. Yes, astrology is in fact one, and so is the ether theory of the propagation of light, and many other -- many other theories as well. (emphasis mine)
You may find the transcript here. I've linked to the exact question, for your convenience.
Either astrology is a science, or ID is not. Which is it?
>>>sting. Is that an internet rumor?
No. As the judge cited in his ruling.
ID aspires to “change the ground rules” of science and lead
defense expert Professor Behe admitted that his broadened definition of science, which encompasses ID, would also embrace astrology. Moreover, defense expert Professor Minnich acknowledged that for ID to be considered science, the ground rules of science have to be broadened to allow consideration of supernatural forces.
The rigorous attachment to “natural” explanations is an essential attribute to science by definition and by convention. From a practical perspective, attributing unsolved problems about nature to causes and forces that lie outside the natural world is a “science stopper." Once you attribute a cause to an untestable supernatural force, a proposition that cannot be disproven, there is no reason to continue seeking natural explanations as we have our answer.