The design inference

Cobra Snake:I admit to not being much interested in, and to not having followed much the "inteligent design" debate. I did find http://trueorigin.org/behe07.asp to be interesting.Indeed, down through history, there have been rejections of articles that, in hindsite, deserved publication. The example that comes to my mind is that of the early studies of chaos theory. The pioneers had a truely tough time getting published.That aside, Behe's work is taking his perceived gaps in the evolutionary theory (which may or may not be real), and inserting God. This falls outside of the realm of science, and thus outside of the realm of scientific journals.Moose------------------
BS degree, geology, '83
Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Old Earth evolution - Yes
Godly creation - Maybe

quote:

---

Cobra Snake: This is the point I am trying to convey to Joz. Rejection of Behe's work does not have much to do with whether or not he is right (that God is responsible for life), but has more to do with philosophical considerations.

---

But since it indeed does have to do with philosophical consederations, the publishing belongs in journals of philosophy. The internet is a better place, for a wider audience, but he still needs to consider the quality of his writing. I'm not particularly up on his work (once again, I plead a general crumby memory - I have read some of his on line stuff), but he does seem to have a reputation of distortions in the information he presents.MooseAdded by edit: Geology has had it's share of information published, that has turned out to be wrong. It was the best information available at the time, as determined by the peer review process. Later discovered knowledge exposes and corrects the errors.------------------
BS degree, geology, '83
Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Old Earth evolution - Yes
Godly creation - Maybe

​

[This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 04-07-2002]