[Antoninus]

One of Pat's better efforts of late.

The fact that Darwinian evolution needs to be protected from competing theories by men in black robes (the high priests of our secular culture) does not bode well.

What it says to me is that the Darwinian dogmatists are having a hard time dealing with the raft of irreducible complexities that the ID folks are floating at them. Better to have them declared null and void by an extra-scientific judge than to have to tediously address them one at a time.

In the not-too-distant past, scientists would have jumped at the chance to write paper after scholarly paper defeating ID irreducible complexity arguments. Heck, based on the popularity of the topic here on FR, dozens of new journals could be started to address just this issue. Yet for some reason, they can't be bothered. Perhaps they're too busy trying to find new uses for aborted babies or figuring out how sodomy is actually a superior form of sexual expression.

[inquest]

In the not-too-distant past, scientists would have jumped at the chance to write paper after scholarly paper defeating ID irreducible complexity arguments.

The standard objection that you hear a lot is that introducing ID will make kids "ignorant". But in reality, introducing it as a competing theory and examining the different arguments could just as easily result in a fuller treatment of the subject.