Category Religion

Behe Part 3: The Big Flop

Under cross-examination, Michael Behe continued denying that Pandas means what it so clearly says, e.g.:

Q And that s the text that says, “Intelligent design means that various forms of life began abruptly through an intelligent agency.” Correct?
A Yes.
Q It talks about the life beginning abruptly, not just appearing abruptly, correct?
A Well, that s certainly the word it used, but we can ask, how do we know it began abruptly? The only way that we know it began abruptly is through the fossil record.
Q But beginning is different than appearances in the fossil record, correct, Professor Behe?
A I don t take it to mean that way, no.

Read More

Another Resemblance Betwen Scopes and Dover

You may recall that during the Scopes trial, Clarence Darrow called an unusual expert witness, defense attorney William Jennings Bryan himself.

80 years later, in Dover, it’s now the prosecution bringing in the defense team as an exhibit:

During cross-examination in U.S. Middle District Court Monday, [plaintiffs’ attorney Steve] Harvey read the following line from the center’s [the Thomas More Law Center, representing the defendants] site: “Our purpose is to be the sword and shield for people of faith, providing legal representation without charge to defend and protect Christians and their religious beliefs in the public square.”

(emphasis mine)

Read More

Discovery Institute on the Dover Trial

My biggest regret about the Dover ID trial is that the Discovery Institute isn’t on the stand. They’re the ones who have been pushing ID since forever, through their Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture. Just to refresh your memory, here’s what they wrote in 1998:

THE proposition that human beings are created in the image of God is one of the bedrock principles on which Western civilization was built.
[…]
Discovery Institute’s Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its damning cultural legacies. Bringing together leading scholars from the natural sciences and those from the humanities and social sciences, the Center explores how new developments in biology, physics and cognitive science raise serious doubts about scientific materialism and have re-opened the case for the supernatural. The Center awards fellowships for original research, holds conferences, and briefs policymakers about the opportunities for life after materialism.

How well have these words held up over the years? The CSC’s current “About” page says,

Started in 1996, the Center for Science and Culture is a Discovery Institute program which:

  • supports research by scientists and other scholars challenging various aspects of neo-Darwinian theory;
  • supports research by scientists and other scholars developing the scientific theory known as intelligent design;
  • supports research by scientists and scholars in the social sciences and humanities exploring the impact of scientific materialism on culture.
  • encourages schools to improve science education by teaching students more fully about the theory of evolution, including the theory’s scientific weaknesses as well strengths.

Read More

Behe Part 2: Pomo vs. Buzzsaw

Michael Behe’s cross-examination started well. He answered the first four questions with as much confidence and aplomb as when he was answering the planned and rehearsed questions at the direct examination. For the record, those questions were:

  1. How are you?
  2. Professor Behe, do you have a copy of your deposition and expert report up there with you?
  3. And I saw that you had a copy of Pandas, but do you have a copy of Darwin’s Black Box with you?
  4. Professor Behe, there are many many peer-reviewed articles regarding the Big Bang theory, correct?

After that, it was all downhill.

Read More

Behe: the Bore Before the Storm

Call me a wonk if you like, but I actually slogged through the Dover trial transcripts for Michael Behe’s testimony. I do hope you appreciate, gentle readers, the sacrifices I make for you.

The nutshell version: Is Intelligent Design science that should be taught in school? It depends on what your definition of “is” is.

Read More

Creationism After Dover

As I wrote elsewhere, it looks as though the question is not whether the Intelligent Design Creationists will lose the Dover case, but how badly. But I don’t imagine for a moment that they’ll just throw up their hands and give up. So the question is, what’ll they do next?

Read More

Dover Trial QOTD

From the Dover Intelligent Design trial, in Beth Eveland’s examination in day 3:

Q. Do you have it in front of you?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. And can you tell us what it is?

A. It looks to me to be a copy of a letter to the editor that I wrote.

Q. And I’m going to ask you to read this letter into the record.

A. Okay.

MR. MUISE: Objection, Your Honor. This letter is hearsay.

THE COURT: Say it again. I’m sorry.

MR. MUISE: Objection, hearsay.

THE COURT: Why is it hearsay?

MR. MUISE: She’s going to be reading in the letter, the contents of the statement. It’s an out-of-court statement. They’re obviously offering it for the truth of the matter.

THE COURT: Who wrote the letter?

MR. MUISE: She wrote the letter.

THE COURT: Overruled.

Michael Behe Gets His Ass Handed to Him

Michael Behe, a professor at Lehigh University, and one of the leading proponents of Intelligent Design, has been on the witness stand in the Dover ID trial. And it looks as though he had his ass handed to him.

The York Daily Record writes:

In his writings supporting intelligent design, Michael Behe, a Lehigh University biochemistry professor and author of “Darwin’s Black Box,” said that “intelligent design theory focuses exclusively on proposed mechanisms of how complex biological structures arose.”

But during cross examination Tuesday, when plaintiffs’ attorney Eric Rothschild asked Behe to identify those mechanisms, he couldn’t.

I think what this really boils down to is “ID is the answer, but only if you ask the question in a very specific manner”, and the lawyer isn’t playing along and asking the correct questions.

Read More

Pledge of Allegiance Ruled Unconstitutional

A federal judge has ruled the Pledge of Allegiance to be unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton sided with atheist Michael Newdow in ruling Wednesday that the pledge’s reference to God violates the rights of children in three school districts to be “free from a coercive requirement to affirm God.”

Okay, this part is pretty much a no-brainer. But there are other problems with the pledge.
Read More

Pascal’s T-Shirt

PZ Meyeyers provides the most succinct refutation of Pascal’s Wager that I’ve seen:

Suppose I had a million dollars. Then I would be rich! Therefore, I have a million dollars.

I suppose a better parallel would run something like:

If I think I’m rich, and I really am rich, then I get lots of good stuff.
If I think I’m rich, but I’m really not, I can’t spend my money anyway, so I haven’t really lost anything.
If I don’t think I’m rich, but I really am, then the IRS will demand a lot more money from me than I think I have, which will make me sad.
If I don’t think I’m rich, and I’m really not, I haven’t gained or lost anything.

However, PZ’s version fits on a T-shirt or bumper sticker, and is a lot snappier.