<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Michael Behe on Point of Inquiry</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/</link>
	<description>by Hemant Mehta</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:10:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88243</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:43:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88243</guid>
		<description>DJ was pretty restrained but still managed to give Behe enough rope with which to hang himself.  It was a good interview and both men were civil which was great but Behe just continued with his trademark dishonesty on this subject.  I tried to add a comment to the CFI forum but have had trouble signing up and cannot add anything.

I just wanted to make anyone out there aware of this &lt;a href=&quot;http://youtube.com/watch?v=JVRsWAjvQSg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;video&lt;/a&gt; on Youtube.  Ken Miller had already told many of those little stories in his talk at Case Western and managed to thoroughly trounce all of Behe&#039;s typical arguments.  It was fun to see them acted out on last night&#039;s NOVA special.  If anyone has an account on CFI please feel free to post the video link under to the Behe interview discussion.

It&#039;s encouraging to see that there are some very intelligent religious scientists out there who won&#039;t stand for this ridiculous ID movement.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DJ was pretty restrained but still managed to give Behe enough rope with which to hang himself.  It was a good interview and both men were civil which was great but Behe just continued with his trademark dishonesty on this subject.  I tried to add a comment to the CFI forum but have had trouble signing up and cannot add anything.</p>
<p>I just wanted to make anyone out there aware of this <a href="http://youtube.com/watch?v=JVRsWAjvQSg" rel="nofollow">video</a> on Youtube.  Ken Miller had already told many of those little stories in his talk at Case Western and managed to thoroughly trounce all of Behe&#8217;s typical arguments.  It was fun to see them acted out on last night&#8217;s NOVA special.  If anyone has an account on CFI please feel free to post the video link under to the Behe interview discussion.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s encouraging to see that there are some very intelligent religious scientists out there who won&#8217;t stand for this ridiculous ID movement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas J Wood</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88206</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas J Wood</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 14:31:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88206</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think I could have been more disappointed with a person who&#039;s views are contrary to my own. He makes Kent Hovind sound like a beacon of honesty, integrity and critical thinking. He even repeats the tired ID canard about the judge &quot;plagiarizing&quot; an &lt;em&gt;amicus&lt;/em&gt; brief. As a lawyer, I would like to repeat THIS IS A COMMON PRACTICE. If a judge uses the language of your brief or something you mentioned in oral argument its not only OK but a personal thrill for any lawyer. Lawyers even have a term for it &quot;getting published.&quot; Behe&#039;s &quot;breathtaking inanity&quot; is boundless.

I was also struck by his rather extreme lack of humility. He gave me the impression that he reveled in the attention his notoriety has given him. I think I would have liked him better if he was a selfless ideologue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think I could have been more disappointed with a person who&#8217;s views are contrary to my own. He makes Kent Hovind sound like a beacon of honesty, integrity and critical thinking. He even repeats the tired ID canard about the judge &#8220;plagiarizing&#8221; an <em>amicus</em> brief. As a lawyer, I would like to repeat THIS IS A COMMON PRACTICE. If a judge uses the language of your brief or something you mentioned in oral argument its not only OK but a personal thrill for any lawyer. Lawyers even have a term for it &#8220;getting published.&#8221; Behe&#8217;s &#8220;breathtaking inanity&#8221; is boundless.</p>
<p>I was also struck by his rather extreme lack of humility. He gave me the impression that he reveled in the attention his notoriety has given him. I think I would have liked him better if he was a selfless ideologue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mriana</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88174</link>
		<dc:creator>Mriana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 13:19:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88174</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m thinking you are being sarcastic, esp with &quot;one of the best&quot;.  Poor DJ.  Why did he choose to interview him?  Never mind, I&#039;ll ask him on the CFI board.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m thinking you are being sarcastic, esp with &#8220;one of the best&#8221;.  Poor DJ.  Why did he choose to interview him?  Never mind, I&#8217;ll ask him on the CFI board.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aj</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88167</link>
		<dc:creator>Aj</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 13:03:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88167</guid>
		<description>If you want to waste 30minutes listening to &quot;one of the best&quot; interviews on Point of Inquiry, with a dishonest creationist advocating ID and dodging questions, where you can almost hear DJ sigh and moan, before moving onto another question that isn&#039;t answered.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you want to waste 30minutes listening to &#8220;one of the best&#8221; interviews on Point of Inquiry, with a dishonest creationist advocating ID and dodging questions, where you can almost hear DJ sigh and moan, before moving onto another question that isn&#8217;t answered.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mriana</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88165</link>
		<dc:creator>Mriana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:56:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88165</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;At least he mentions William Paley, a natural theologian who was pro-ID and was taken seriously, back in, uh, 1802? Way to back up your hypothesis by pointing to opinions from 200 years ago, Dr. Behe.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I told you he was archiac and I haven&#039;t even listened to the podcast.  I&#039;m not sure if I&#039;m going to bother listening after hearing him on PBS.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>At least he mentions William Paley, a natural theologian who was pro-ID and was taken seriously, back in, uh, 1802? Way to back up your hypothesis by pointing to opinions from 200 years ago, Dr. Behe.</p></blockquote>
<p>I told you he was archiac and I haven&#8217;t even listened to the podcast.  I&#8217;m not sure if I&#8217;m going to bother listening after hearing him on PBS.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cautious</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88051</link>
		<dc:creator>cautious</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 07:18:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88051</guid>
		<description>Additional comments from this cautious mind...

~12.30

Behe Claim: After Denton&#039;s 1985 book &lt;em&gt;Evolution: A Theory in Crisis&lt;/em&gt;, he started to have doubts about evolution.  As did Philip Johnson.  The ID movement was sorta started by Philip Johnson and other like-minded thinkers in the early 1990s, and they first wanted to talk about ID to educated laypeople, not public school children or anything.

Contrary Facts: &lt;em&gt;Of Pandas and People&lt;/em&gt;, a public school textbook published in 1987, was one of the first books to reference intelligent design, by those exact words.  Philip Johnson&#039;s &lt;em&gt;Darwin on Trial&lt;/em&gt; from 1991 references &lt;em&gt;Of Pandas and People&lt;/em&gt;.  

Truth?: ID was already being pushed in the public school system, and then the people who eventually self-collected themselves into the Discovery Institute took the idea of ID and tried to make it more scientifically appetizing.  

21.10

At least he mentions William Paley, a natural theologian who was pro-ID and was taken seriously, back in, uh, 1802?  Way to back up your hypothesis by pointing to opinions from 200 years ago, Dr. Behe.

33.30-34.20

Wow, watch as Michael Behe jumps the shark by trying to say that the damage that (in his opinion) intelligently designed malaria causes to people is not inconsistent with a benevolent God and ends up basically saying &quot;God works in mysterious ways&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Additional comments from this cautious mind&#8230;</p>
<p>~12.30</p>
<p>Behe Claim: After Denton&#8217;s 1985 book <em>Evolution: A Theory in Crisis</em>, he started to have doubts about evolution.  As did Philip Johnson.  The ID movement was sorta started by Philip Johnson and other like-minded thinkers in the early 1990s, and they first wanted to talk about ID to educated laypeople, not public school children or anything.</p>
<p>Contrary Facts: <em>Of Pandas and People</em>, a public school textbook published in 1987, was one of the first books to reference intelligent design, by those exact words.  Philip Johnson&#8217;s <em>Darwin on Trial</em> from 1991 references <em>Of Pandas and People</em>.  </p>
<p>Truth?: ID was already being pushed in the public school system, and then the people who eventually self-collected themselves into the Discovery Institute took the idea of ID and tried to make it more scientifically appetizing.  </p>
<p>21.10</p>
<p>At least he mentions William Paley, a natural theologian who was pro-ID and was taken seriously, back in, uh, 1802?  Way to back up your hypothesis by pointing to opinions from 200 years ago, Dr. Behe.</p>
<p>33.30-34.20</p>
<p>Wow, watch as Michael Behe jumps the shark by trying to say that the damage that (in his opinion) intelligently designed malaria causes to people is not inconsistent with a benevolent God and ends up basically saying &#8220;God works in mysterious ways&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cautious</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88031</link>
		<dc:creator>cautious</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 06:17:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88031</guid>
		<description>5.30 in and I already call &quot;BS&quot;

DJ asks something along the lines of &quot;ID proponents didnt go from being Christian to supporting ID?&quot;

Behe says &quot;Well, many actually didn&#039;t, I didn&#039;t, and a couple guys I know pretty well, Bill Dembski, Johnathan Wells, didn&#039;t either&quot;

Actual quotes from William Dembski:

&quot;Intelligent design is just the Logos theology of John&#039;s Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory&quot;

&quot;Any view of the sciences that leaves Christ out of the picture must be seen as fundamentally deficient. ... The conceptual soundness of a scientific theory cannot be maintained apart from Christ.&quot;

&quot;Intelligent Design opens the whole possibility of us being created in the image of a benevolent God. ... The job of apologetics is to clear the ground, to clear obstacles that prevent people from coming to the knowledge of Christ. ... And if there&#039;s anything that I think has blocked the growth of Christ as the free reign of the Spirit and people accepting the Scripture and Jesus Christ, it is the Darwinian naturalistic view.&quot;

And as far as Johnathan Wells, the whole reason he went to school to get a PhD in biology was because Sun-Myung Moon (basically) told him to, or, in his words, &quot;Father chose me&quot;.  

Behe has another 32 minutes to be dishonest, let&#039;s see what else he has...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>5.30 in and I already call &#8220;BS&#8221;</p>
<p>DJ asks something along the lines of &#8220;ID proponents didnt go from being Christian to supporting ID?&#8221;</p>
<p>Behe says &#8220;Well, many actually didn&#8217;t, I didn&#8217;t, and a couple guys I know pretty well, Bill Dembski, Johnathan Wells, didn&#8217;t either&#8221;</p>
<p>Actual quotes from William Dembski:</p>
<p>&#8220;Intelligent design is just the Logos theology of John&#8217;s Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;Any view of the sciences that leaves Christ out of the picture must be seen as fundamentally deficient. &#8230; The conceptual soundness of a scientific theory cannot be maintained apart from Christ.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;Intelligent Design opens the whole possibility of us being created in the image of a benevolent God. &#8230; The job of apologetics is to clear the ground, to clear obstacles that prevent people from coming to the knowledge of Christ. &#8230; And if there&#8217;s anything that I think has blocked the growth of Christ as the free reign of the Spirit and people accepting the Scripture and Jesus Christ, it is the Darwinian naturalistic view.&#8221;</p>
<p>And as far as Johnathan Wells, the whole reason he went to school to get a PhD in biology was because Sun-Myung Moon (basically) told him to, or, in his words, &#8220;Father chose me&#8221;.  </p>
<p>Behe has another 32 minutes to be dishonest, let&#8217;s see what else he has&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Australian Atheist</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88018</link>
		<dc:creator>Australian Atheist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 05:42:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88018</guid>
		<description>Point of Inquiry podcast is regularly excellent.

Is there an argument to be made that they shouldn&#039;t be giving Behe any more publicity? 

He is an intellectual minnow, let alone when you compare him to DJ&#039;s other guests.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Point of Inquiry podcast is regularly excellent.</p>
<p>Is there an argument to be made that they shouldn&#8217;t be giving Behe any more publicity? </p>
<p>He is an intellectual minnow, let alone when you compare him to DJ&#8217;s other guests.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shalini</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88013</link>
		<dc:creator>Shalini</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 05:33:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-88013</guid>
		<description>DJ seems to have remarkable restraint.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DJ seems to have remarkable restraint.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mriana</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-87998</link>
		<dc:creator>Mriana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 04:57:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/11/13/michael-behe-on-point-of-inquiry/#comment-87998</guid>
		<description>I heard Behe tonight on the PBS Nova show &quot;Intelligent Design on Trial&quot;.  He reminded me of the scientist/doctor/teacher woman on the TNG episode in which Data lost his memory, the people got radiation sickness, and when he put the cure in the well water, they &quot;killed&quot; him.  This woman said there are four elements- fire, air, earth, water.  Data tried to correct her archiac science and she took offense to it.

Behe gave me the same chuckle, because his &quot;science&quot; sounded much similar.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I heard Behe tonight on the PBS Nova show &#8220;Intelligent Design on Trial&#8221;.  He reminded me of the scientist/doctor/teacher woman on the TNG episode in which Data lost his memory, the people got radiation sickness, and when he put the cure in the well water, they &#8220;killed&#8221; him.  This woman said there are four elements- fire, air, earth, water.  Data tried to correct her archiac science and she took offense to it.</p>
<p>Behe gave me the same chuckle, because his &#8220;science&#8221; sounded much similar.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic (User agent is rejected)
Page Caching using disk: enhanced (User agent is rejected)
Database Caching using disk: basic
Object Caching 300/308 objects using disk: basic
Content Delivery Network via Amazon Web Services: S3: wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com (user agent is rejected)

Served from: www.patheos.com @ 2012-02-14 07:32:30 -->
