Replies

...Michael Behe's, Darwin's Black Box... a good place to start...

Behe has been totally refuted. See this article, where he is shown to have deliberately misquoted a scientist.

The fact that Behe has resorted to this type of lying says all that we need to know about him.

Does anyone have examples of normal scientists misquoting anti-E's?

--- Behe has been totally refuted. --

This link, http://www.arn.org/docs/behe/m b_brrespbr.htm, will lead you to Behe's response to Coyne's criticisms.

It always amazes me how Darwinists, like democrats, resort to name calling in the absence of substantial contrary evidence. Your post is a clear example of atheisms high handed rule over science. By implying that "anti-E's" are not "normal" scientists, you have tipped your hat.

As I have mentioned in other posts, science most be free of ideological overtones if progress will ever be made in researching the true origins of life and the universe. Science stagnated under the dogmatic rule of the church in the middle ages and the study of origins is stagnating under the atheistic ideologues today. By limiting science to an atheistic worldview you are limiting progress.

Aah the usual charge of out of context quotes. Who cares for those charges by evolutionists. The guy does not even give the quote by Behe for comparions, that's how lame the charge is. However, you do not seem to mind the many totally deliberate frauds by evolutionists such as Haeckel's embryos, the moths, the finches, Lucy, eosymias, Piltdown Man and many more. That is okay. BTW - there is in your article not a single word refuting the scientific arguments made by Behe, not a single word.