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?