Unlike William A. Dembski and others in the intelligent design
movement, Behe accepts the common descent of species, including that
humans descended from other primates, although he states that common
descent does not by itself explain the differences between species. He
also accepts the scientific consensus on the age of the Earth and the
age of the Universe. In his own words:
QUOTE from 1997:
I want to be explicit about what I am, and am not, questioning. The word
"evolution" carries many associations. Usually it means common descent
-- the idea that all organisms living and dead are related by common
ancestry. I have no quarrel with the idea of common descent, and
continue to think it explains similarities among species. By itself,
however, common descent doesn't explain the vast differences among species.
Behe also made similar statements in responses to his critics at the
turn of the century. He used it as a defense to critical comments that
Irreducible Complexity was being used as the usual creationist
anti-evoluion junk. Behe claimed that he was not anti-evolution so
those associations could not be made. The scientific creationists had
their "the flagellum is a designed machine" argument long before Behe
claimed IC meant designed. Black Box was publilshed in 1995 and IC
never became any more than the flagellum is a designed machine claims of
the scientific creationists. Behe claims that he can test the notion,
but he has never attempted any testing. IC never progressed past the
He describes himself as an evolutionist and he has rejected biblical
Denton has the Deistic belief that his intelligent designer got the ball
rolling with the Big Bang and it all unfolded into what we see today.
Nothing that we can discover about nature would go against Denton's
belief, but the vast majority of IDiots don't want to believe it, and it
isn't close to being a testable scientific hypothesis.
I put this up because Glenn has indicated that he never understood that
Behe was not anti-evolution. The level of denial that it takes to
remain so willfully ignorant for decades would seem to be unbelievable,
but that doesn't mean that the IDiots that are left are not that badly off.
Most of the ID perps are anti-evolution creationists.
Dembski was mentioned as being anti-evolution in one of the quotes above.
Dembski holds that his knowledge of statistics and his skepticism
concerning evolutionary theory led him to believe that the extraordinary
diversity of life was statistically unlikely to have been produced by
Reference 10 link is dead, but no one should doubt that Dembski is
Dembski recently came back to IDiocy after claiming to have moved on
several years ago. He just couldn't make an honest living, so IDiocy is
stuck with him. None of old Dembski junk made the ID Perp Top Six, so
there was no reason for his return.
There probably isn't any doubt that Meyer, Kenyon, Thaxton, Wells and
Nelson (among the group that I recall as original ID perps at the
Discovery Institute) are anti-evolution. Berlinski doesn't seem to be
any more of an agnostic than Denton, and his love of the old scientific
creationist anti-evolution junk would seem to make him anti-evolution.
I don't recall Berlinski putting up anything except arguments that had
already been well used by the scientific creationists. He has claimed
to have never bought into the intelligent design claptrap, so he may
just be a contrarian. Minnich is likely anti-evolution, but he doesn't
make a big deal about it.
Except for a couple of ID perps it does look like the intelligent design
creationist scam is just a name change for the old scientific
creationist ploy. Both groups claimed to want to do the science to
support their religious beliefs, but no science ever got done, and both
groups ended up with the same god-of-the-gaps denial stupidity that the
ID perps put up as their Top Six nearly 4 years ago. The difference
seems to be that IDiocy turned into the creationist bait and switch scam
that creationists are running on themselves, and scientific creationism
has pretty much faded into the nothing that it always was.
My take is that scientific creationism could make a comeback. There
hasn't been any creationist rubes stupid enough to want to teach ID
since 2017. This is likely the longest stretch between bait and switch
scam instances since the bait and switch started in 2002. No IDiot
rubes ever get any ID science. All the rubes get is an obfuscation
switch scam that the ID perps claim has nothing to do with IDiocy. Even
though the ID perps keep updating their teach ID scam propaganda, it
seems to be difficult to find rubes stupid enough to try to teach the
junk at this late date in the bait and switch scam. So what is the next
creationist ploy going to be? IDiots with similar beliefs as Behe have
suggested "evolutionary creation", but most IDiots are anti-evolution
creationists and have no interest in teaching their kids evolutionary
ID scam Teach ID pamphlet:
The ID perps keep updating this junk every 3 years or so, but they still
have their old education policy in it claiming to have a scientific
theory of ID to teach in the public schools and the original junk
claiming that the Dover decision was wrong and ID is science and can
still be taught in the public schools. They have added some things
besides updating the pictures from time to time, but a lot of the old
junk is unchanged since it was first published after Dover.
One thing that IDiots should figure out for themselves is that the other
ID perps that claim to have been influenced by Denton (Theory in crisis)
and Behe (Black box) were obviously misled in terms of their
anti-evolution beliefs. Just like Glenn they refuse to understand what
the situation actually is and was at the time.
It hasn't helped that Behe and Denton have relied on the
misunderstanding to keep selling their books. Really, if Behe were ever
able to confirm that the flagellum was IC he would be telling the IDiot
rubes what the designer did over a billion years ago with the then
existing parts to make them work together as a flagellum. Behe would
know where the parts came from and what changes were made by his
designer at that time to make the flagellum work. How many IDiots would
be interested in such ground breaking scientific verification of Behe's
IC? The obvious answer is likely the reason why Behe has never
attempted any verification. Denton's and Behe's junk has only been used
for denial purposes by IDiots. It shouldn't be any surprise to IDiots,
that this is the case because Denton and Behe have only used their junk
for denial purposes. Has either one of them ever tried to construct
some type of positive theory for IDiocy? Denton has an alternative, but
it isn't based on anything except denial, and the vast majority of
IDiots don't like Denton's alternative.