Michael Behe
Michael Behe
Michael J. Beheis an American biochemist, author, and intelligent designadvocate. He serves as professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania and as a senior fellow of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. Behe is best known for his argument for his stance on irreducible complexity, which argues that some biochemical structures are too complex to be explained by known evolutionary mechanisms and are therefore probably the result of intelligent design. Behe has testified in several court cases...
NationalityAmerican
ProfessionScientist
CountryUnited States of America
scientific literature has no answers to the question of the origin of the immune system.
We can look high or we can look low in books or in journals, but the result is the same. The scientific literature has no answers to the question of the origin of the immune system.
it's dangerous to your career to be identified as an ID proponent.
Evolution no longer looks like a random process to me; it looks like a set-up job. My sense is that we'll discover the means to detect the design scientifically.
This continues the venerable Darwinian tradition of making grandiose claims based on piddling results. There is nothing in the paper that an ID proponent would think was beyond random mutation and natural selection. In other words, it is a straw man.
The National Academy of Sciences treats intelligent design in a way what I consider utterly misleading. Talk about scholarly malfeasance!
are unequivocal in their support of evolutionary theory.
Because of the immense publicity that's mushroomed around this issue in the past six months, more people are getting emotional about the topic. And it's generally not on my side.
Many systems in the cell show signs of purposeful intelligent design. What science has discovered in the cell in the past 50 years is poorly explained by a gradual theory such as Darwin's.
It's the nature of bureaucracy, I think, to issue statements like this.
It was a real disappointment. It's hard to say this chills the atmosphere, because if you're publicly known as an ID supporter, you can already kiss your tenure chances goodbye. It doesn't help.
Creationism is a theological concept but intelligent design is a scientific theory. One can be a creationist without any physical evidence. That's 180 degrees different from intelligent design.
Although I find it congenial to think that it's God, others might prefer to think it's an alien or who knows? An angel, or some satanic force, some new age power.
When you start putting constraints on science, science suffers.