Klinghoffer Responds to McBride Review

David Klinghoffer, who often writes histrionically for the Discovery Institute, has written a response to Paul McBride's review of Science & Human Origins called “Paul McBridge: Darwinist Hero of the Hour.” For some reason, he clings to this word “Darwinist,” as though it actually describes anyone who practices evolutionary biology. He really means it perjoratively, of course. He writes:

Yet there's a familiar pattern where these very same bloggers, including some scientists at reputable universities, shy from actually reading material from the intelligent-design community. At best, they'll find someone else who claims to have read it and rely on his say-so that the book or article is no good.

He could say that about me and, in this instance, be correct. I have not read the book yet. He claims that Darwinists are afraid of ID arguments. This is nonsense. There are very long reviews of Signature in the Cell by a number of “Darwinists.” I have read several Phillip Johnson books and reviewed them. The problem is that the arguments don't change.

William Dembski has written several books on how he thinks complex specified information applies to biology. When people shoot holes in the arguments, he just shuts the comments down. Further, he makes no attempt to have his articles published in biology journals.

Stephen Meyer's work Signature in the Cell is based partly on Douglas Axe's work and ideas, which are then regurgitated for the new book. Those arguments haven't changed.

Instead of getting a palaeoanthropologist to write a chapter on human origins fossils, they get a lawyer who has no training in the field to do it. I don't need to read Casey Luskin's arguments against human evolution in Science & Human Origins. I have read them before. They haven't changed—even in the face of new evidence.

I intend to read the book but for now I am content that Paul McBride has identified the principle problems. They are the same ones that were present in ID five years ago.

Win a Free Copy of Signature in the Cell

Anyluckyday.com is sponsoring a contest in which you can win a copy of Signature in the Cell, the book by Stephen Meyer promoting the idea that the molecular genetics of the cell show the handiwork of a designer. Here is the promo video:



As you know, there is a lively discussion going on right now about the book between Meyer and Steve Matheson, up at Calvin College. He reviewed it chapter by chapter in his blog and the latest installment can be found here.

----------------
Now playing: Steve Hackett - Hands of the Priestess
via FoxyTunes

Steve Matheson Writes an Open Letter to Stephen Meyer

Steve Matheson has posted on his blog an open letter to Stephen Meyer following their colloquium/debate at Biola University. Subsequent to the event, a posting on the Discovery Institute's blog Evolution News and Views claimed that Dr. Matheson had conceded that design was the best explanation for origins of life questions. In a previous post, he writes that this isn't so. Here, he takes the gloves off:

Your Discovery Institute is a horrific mistake, an epic intellectual tragedy that is degrading the minds of those who consume its products and bringing dishonor to you and to the church. It is for good reason that Casey Luskin is held in such extreme contempt by your movement's critics, and there's something truly sick about the pattern of attacks that your operatives launched in the weeks after the Biola event. It's clear that you have a cadre of attack dogs that do this work for you, and some of them seem unconstrained by standards of integrity. I can't state this strongly enough: the Discovery Institute is a dangerous cancer on the Christian intellect, both because of its unyielding commitment to dishonesty and because of its creepy mission to undermine science itself. I'd like to see you do better, but I have no such hope for your institute. It needs to be destroyed, and I will do what I can to bring that about.

As Glenn Reynolds would say: Ouch! It is quite clear that those writing for the Discovery Institute have a fairly minimal grasp on the discipline (evolution) that they so seek to denigrate. This is clear from the writings of William Dembski, Michael Behe, Jonathan Marks, Jonathan Wells and Philip Johnson. It is also true that many posts or press releases from the Discovery Institute are either misleading or false (here, here, here, here and here just to name a few). All told, this gives one pause as to whether this organization is really involved whatever in a scientific enterprise and that it seeks to address the debate in an honest way.

----------------
Now playing: Todd Rundgren - Open My Eyes
via FoxyTunes