First Modern Science Text on Intelligent Design, Darwin's Black Box, Celebrates New 10th Anniversary Edition
Jason Spaceman
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SEATTLE, Sept. 11 /PRNewswire/ -- Ten years ago, biochemist Michael
Behe helped to launch the modern intelligent design movement when he
outlined the theory of irreducible complexity in his book Darwin's
Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, which dared to
question the basic tenets of Darwinism.
Arguing that unintelligent accounts failed to explain the development
of irreducibly complex systems such as blood clotting, the human
immune system and the bacterial flagellum, Darwin's Black Box was
internationally reviewed in over one hundred publications and named
one of the 100 most important books of the 20th century by National
Review and World magazine. There are now a quarter million copies in
print.
"While Behe is best known for his irreducible complexity hypothesis, I
admire him more for his willingness to take a public stand for
academic freedom in the face of withering attacks on his person and
his record," said Forest M. Mims, III., chair of the Texas Academy of
Sciences Environmental Science Section. "Open-minded readers will soon
learn that Behe raises questions that his opponents have yet to
adequately answer."
Behe's argument entered the mainstream with Cambridge University's
2004 publication of "Debating Design from Darwin to DNA," which had
prominent scientists present their views of intelligent design based
on Behe's arguments from Darwin's Black Box.
Simon & Schuster have now published an updated version of Behe's
seminal work with a new afterword by the author reflecting the current
debate, which has been substantially buttressed by new scientific
research and exposition.
To schedule interviews or request a press kit please contact Anika
Smith at asm...@discovery.org, or (206) 292-0401 x155.
SOURCE Discovery Institute
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read it at
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/09-11-2006/0004430364&EDATE=
or http://tinyurl.com/z5z7n
J. Spaceman
Desertphile
Jason Spaceman wrote:
> Found this press release online:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> SEATTLE, Sept. 11 /PRNewswire/ -- Ten years ago, biochemist Michael
> outlined the theory [sic] of irreducible complexity in his book Darwin's
> Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, which dared to
Yeah, and Behe was GREAT at torpedo-ing intelligent design movement
(which is about as "modern" as toast) in Dover, PA.
Alexander
Jason Spaceman wrote:
> Found this press release online:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> SEATTLE, Sept. 11 /PRNewswire/ -- Ten years ago, biochemist Michael
> Behe helped to launch the modern intelligent design movement when he
> outlined the theory of irreducible complexity in his book Darwin's
> Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, which dared to
> question the basic tenets of Darwinism.
>
> Arguing that unintelligent accounts failed to explain the development
> of irreducibly complex systems such as blood clotting, the human
> immune system and the bacterial flagellum, Darwin's Black Box was
> internationally reviewed in over one hundred publications and named
> one of the 100 most important books of the 20th century by National
> Review and World magazine. There are now a quarter million copies in
> print.
>
> "While Behe is best known for his irreducible complexity hypothesis, I
> admire him more for his willingness to take a public stand for
> academic freedom in the face of withering attacks on his person and
> his record," said Forest M. Mims, III., chair of the Texas Academy of
> Sciences Environmental Science Section. "Open-minded readers will soon
> learn that Behe raises questions that his opponents have yet to
> adequately answer."
Could Mr Mimms be the same Fellow of the DI found here?
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=35&isFellow=true
... apparently he is. Quelle surprise. There seems to be a variable
quality to the term 'adequately answer' as well. i.e. when answers are
provided the science is subsequently drowned out by the scraping of
goal posts hastily being dragged somewhere else on the pitch. I'm
waiting for someone to actually demand a complete fossil record of
bio-chemical evolution. It's only a matter of time.
>
> Behe's argument entered the mainstream with Cambridge University's
> 2004 publication of "Debating Design from Darwin to DNA," which had
> prominent scientists present their views of intelligent design based
> on Behe's arguments from Darwin's Black Box.
Entered the mainstream alongside 'UFO Today' and 'Practical Astrology'
perhaps.
>
> Simon & Schuster have now published an updated version of Behe's
> seminal work with a new afterword by the author reflecting the current
> debate, which has been substantially buttressed by new scientific
> research and exposition.
Sorry? 'New' research? Have DI got a secret lab somewhere that no one
in the scientific community know about? Has Behe actually read any of
the literature within his own field since Dover?
Oh ... sorry ... I keep forgetting about the giant atheist conspiracy
to keep this knowledge from the world. Must get my membership renewed
as well.
Mike Dworetsky
news:365cg2hhvpig45d3b...@4ax.com...
Does the new edition feature an appendix with unabridged transcripts of
Behe's Dover testimony and cross-examination?
Where is all that "new" research published?
>
> SOURCE Discovery Institute
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>
> Read it at
>
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/09-11-2006/0004430364&EDATE=
> or http://tinyurl.com/z5z7n
>
>
--
Mike Dworetsky
(Remove "pants" spamblock to send e-mail)
Robert Carnegie
I'm guessing "a new afterword by the author reflecting the current
debate" is the whole of the updating you'll get. That, and some of the
worse spelling errors fixed. I'm not paying for a copy, but the
reviews may be mildly amusing if they touch on "so what's new".
Perplexed in Peoria
"Robert Carnegie" <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote in message news:1158098225.6...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
I've got a library copy. One can summarize the Afterword as "They tried
to hit me, but they missed." It talks about research published within
the past ten years related to Behe's IC examples. He reviews it briefly
and claims that it misses his points. There is some fresh quote-mining
from recent books by Robert Shapiro and Franklin Harold. But the only
'research' that he cites that actually supports his ideas are a couple
of things he has written himself within the past 10 years - one his
article in the Dembski-Ruse collection, and the other a paper for a
philosophy journal.