tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post6740591548549233355..comments2023-10-29T08:04:00.488-07:00Comments on Quintessence of Dust: Why I'm not a Behe fan, Part IIA: the malaria scamStephen Mathesonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05057004085073574659noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-47652795571057626272008-08-12T19:03:00.000-07:002008-08-12T19:03:00.000-07:00Jim--You have a good point. I guess I thought 750...Jim--<BR/>You have a good point. I guess I thought 7500 words was plenty long enough to explain to laypersons why Behe's book is a joke. The missed opportunity was not a "debate" with Behe; it was a clear explanation of why he's wrong. The snide strawmen didn't help...they hurt. My opinion, anyway, but you're right that at the other extreme we would find ourselves granting legitimacy to nonsense. <A HREF="http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1058/is_22_124/ai_n27432704" REL="nofollow">Joan Roughgarden</A> had the right idea, I thought, though I aim to be a lot harder on Behe's negligence and misconduct. She pointed to his mistakes, but also noted the legitimacy of his basic questions and gave him credit for leaving opposition to common descent behind.<BR/><BR/>Donald--<BR/>I explained my dismay with Coyne's reckless response to Judson in a <A HREF="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2008/01/24/hopeless-monsters-a-guest-post-from-dr-jerry-coyne/#comment-5919" REL="nofollow">comment on Carl's blog</A>; see also <A HREF="http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2008/01/monstrous_hope_reply_to_coturn.php" REL="nofollow">Greg Laden's blog</A> for further discussion, where Brian of <A HREF="http://scienceblogs.com/laelaps" REL="nofollow">Laelaps</A> and Larry Moran of <A HREF="http://sandwalk.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow">Sandwalk</A> chime in.Stephen Mathesonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05057004085073574659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-12050716002417955412008-08-12T18:38:00.000-07:002008-08-12T18:38:00.000-07:00I'm sorta interested in what you see as wrong in C...I'm sorta interested in what you see as wrong in Coyne's critique of Judson. Is his dismissal of hopeful monsters wrong, in your view? Or were you just criticizing his style? <BR/><BR/><BR/>DonaldAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-63021403220624965122008-08-12T06:41:00.000-07:002008-08-12T06:41:00.000-07:00"As Rosenhouse predicted, the shoddy nature of Coy..."As Rosenhouse predicted, the shoddy nature of Coyne's review enabled Behe to avoid a full-scale defense of his folk science."<BR/><BR/>I see what you mean, but isn't there a bit of a Catch-22 in this. If Behe's work is folk science (as I believe it is) wouldn't giving him an opportunity to defend it mean engaging him in a serious scientific argument thereby giving his ideas credence. If there is no scientific backing for his argument, why bother letting him defend it?<BR/><BR/>(who's more foolish - the fool or the person arguing with the fool?)Jim Lemirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14000051293978203511noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-50796539371268710202008-08-12T06:03:00.000-07:002008-08-12T06:03:00.000-07:00Looking forward to the next installment, Steve.I h...Looking forward to the next installment, Steve.<BR/><BR/>I highly recommend Nick's article as well. (It's a shame really that you two weren't hired by the Times Book Review and New Republic, instead of Dawkins and Coyne).John Farrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18280296574996987228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-37506743884658993302008-08-12T03:23:00.000-07:002008-08-12T03:23:00.000-07:00Nice blog. And it's great to see someone picking a...Nice blog. And it's great to see someone picking apart an ID arguement with the one thing they don't have: science. If I made claims as dodgy as that in my lab (or supported it with evidence that bad) I'd be out straight away. The only way Behe can get away with it is by not beng a scientist.<BR/><BR/>The thing that annoys me about the man is that when people try to tell him he's wrong, he insists they are. Maybe he really does believe all the work he's doing is correct. :(Lab Rathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07962574174521597312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-88737788741163290142008-08-12T00:24:00.000-07:002008-08-12T00:24:00.000-07:00Hi! If you haven't seen it my review of Behe in T...Hi! If you haven't seen it my review of Behe in TREE is here:<BR/>http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/10/full-text-of-th.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com