Behe Counters the Best Objections to Irreducible Complexity and ID, Pt 2
Today’s ID the Future continues A Mousetrap for Darwin author Michael Behe’s conversation with philosopher Pat Flynn, focused on some of the more substantive objections to Behe’s case for intelligent design in biology. In this segment the pair discuss the bacterial flagellum, the cilium, and the blood clotting cascade, and tackle critiques from Alvin Plantinga, Graham Oppy, Russell Doolittle, Kenneth Miller, and others. This interview is posted here by permission of Pat Flynn.
Behe: Blood Clotting Remains a Mousetrap for Darwin
On this ID the Future, Michael Behe continues discussing his new book, A Mousetrap for Darwin, with host Eric Anderson. Here the focus is the blood clotting cascade. Behe has argued it’s irreducibly complex, like a mousetrap, and that blind evolution couldn’t build it one small functional step at a time. Behe says a better explanation is that it was intelligently designed. His critics have responded to his argument over the years. Here Behe returns the favor. His most prominent interlocutor on the matter is the recently deceased Russell Doolittle. Behe shows that Doolittle misread the paper he relied on to refute Behe. Professor Behe also responds to Kenneth Miller and Keith Robison. According to Behe, his critics have managed to provide little more than hand waving, smoke screens, and the sweeping of crucial problems under the rug. Tune in to catch some of the back and forth, and for a deeper dive into this challenge to modern evolutionary theory, pick up a copy of Behe’s new book.
Behe Responds to the Journal Science, Pt. 2: Darwin Devolves on Trial
On this episode of ID the Future, Andrew McDiarmid continues his conversation with biochemist Michael Behe, author of the newly released Darwin Devolves: The New Science About DNA That Challenges Evolution. Here Behe further presses the case that the review bypasses his book’s main point and that the reviewers appear to have misunderstood the plain language of one of his arguments in a previous book. Also, the reviewers claim that Behe hasn’t answered his critics’ objections on key points, a charge Behe shows is demonstrably false. Despite the negative review, Behe says he remains optimistic. Listen in to learn why. Please consider donating to support the IDTF Podcast.