Irreducible complexity: The beat goes on (for me)

Science and other sci mags are trying to take out intelligent design by flogging up a study that they claimdisproves the ID concept of irreducible complexity (complexity that cannot be simply built up from itty little bit to itty little bit-ter in a Darwinian fashion, and thus must include information from an outside intelligence).

Mike Behe, the concept's author, has replied, of course.

The concept of irreducible complexity has been a itch that Darwinists have compulsively scratched until they finally gave it enough credibility that I knew there was something in it.

The universe and/or life forms show evidence of intelligent design? An idea so obvious and yet so widely persecuted must have a future.

I sort of realized that a decade ago: It was the key reason I grabbed this beat. Every time a prof is dumped, a teacher is fired, a scientist is persecuted, or a government agency is forced by boffins to shovel out money to help warn us that ID is a threat, I have a story. What hack can ask for more?

If you like this blog, check out my book on the intelligent design controversy, By Design or by Chance?. You can read excerpts as well.