Lehigh University is becoming quite active in asserting their opposition to ID. Wonder why?
More like this
Look, everyone!
The Lehigh University Department of Biological Sciences was awarded $1.8 million by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute to fund undergradu
..Dr. Michael Behe is a biochemist at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania.
Short news in Nature says there is a claim for one of the Millennial Clay Problems
About as much as I wonder why The Onion picked Lehigh for this article:
Rogue Scientist Has Own Scientific Method
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/49180
Wait, wait, I know this one:
It's because they're an institute of higher learning with a commitment to teach accurate information.
Amy I right? What do I win?
Couldn't have anything to do with the inconvenient Black Box lodged in thier midst, could it?
Clearly they must be part of the Worldwide Atheist Conspiracy.
Here's a good bit from Jill E. Schneider:
Poor ol' Behe.
...would it be mean to chortle?
Wonder how much arm twisting it took to make him put a disclaimer on his own faculty bio page.
http://www.lehigh.edu/~inbios/faculty/behe.html
To paraphrase
...."My ideas on irreducible complexity and ID in general are my own. Those views are in no way, shape or fashion endorsed by Lehigh University as a whole, or by my colleagues in the biology department, all of whom have concluded I must have been dropped on my head as a child. In other words, I am the department crank / astrologer and thank the supreme designer, whoever he, she or it may be, every day for creating tenure, without which my hiney would have been whacked by the door knob a long time ago."
Also from Behe's page:
...except for the progresss that has been made, which Behe ignores or dismisses...
(ie, either: "much ado about nothing" or "Hallelujah, Amen!" depending on who you ask, and whether we're talking to the press, or in church)
(1996b refers to Darwin's Black Box)
And how much progress has been made in the past 10 years in discriminating reliably between designed and non-designed bits of biology? Or identifying the designer(s), or his/her/their/its methods, or when or why? (In short, all the questions routinely asked, and often also answered, by archaeologists when they dig up likely-designed artefacts from some ancient garbage dump).
Is it even as high as 20% as much as the progress made on biochem in general in that "past half century"?