[Dimensio]

So, the science that supposedly debunked Behe (and I say supposedly because it is clear that if he had been thoroughly debunked he would not still be in the position he is in), and the belief that Dembksi's assumptions were false is irrefutable?

I should be more specific. Theories are never "irrefutable", however they can be proven false through contrary observation. Behe's claims to IC have been shown to be flawed. The examples that he has presented were shown to be bad examples. Irreducable Complexity might be true, but thus far Behe has failed to demonstrate that it is.

[Jeff Head]

Darwin's own theories has also been shown to have flaws...but adherents continue to push his envelope. I suspect that the same will be true of ID.

In that regard, IMHO, in such matters, flawed does not necessarily mean out of the question...or even wrong. Just that it needs fine tuning and tweeking to work those flaws out.