I read this comment related to Behe's new book. Seems accurate.

[KerrMetric]

I live within the Christian community, and I can assure you that the content of this book is completely irrelevant--all that matters is the book's existence. Christians will thumb through the book and see big words and diagrams, and they will imagine all those wicked evolutionists shaking there fists and yelling "That Behe is ruining everything!" Students at Christian schools will quote this book--without understanding it--in their assignments, trusting that, whatever it says, it somehow refutes evolution. At no point will the "science" be examined.
I know this because I was once one of those students.

Doesn't this really sum it all up - content doesn't matter but intent does. This is why it is not a synopsis of peer reviewed work but a book specifically for the purposes of avoiding such critique - and of course making some coin fresh of his Dover embarrassment.

 

[laptoppop]

Excuse me - have you read the book? If not, its just plain wrong to say this.

 

[KerrMetric]

Excuse me - have you read the book? If not, its just plain wrong to say this.

I've read part of it - not the whole thing yet.

But my comment was more related to the idea that in this arena content doesn't matter and the fact it exists does to many people. Behe's book per se is not the issue. Notice, the person I am quoting does not attack Behe's book but the idea that for such a book it's existence far outweighs its content to those on the Creationist/ID side.

 

[laptoppop]

Perhaps for some - but not for the most mature expression of the creationist viewpoints. I am looking for truth - and if something is not right, I drop it, or try to refine it.

These boards have been helpful for me to understand evolutionary theory to a much greater degree. They have also caused me several times to go out, check my sources, check THEIR sources, etc. They have caused me to lose respect for some, and gain respect for others.

However, I'm always trying to find/discuss the most mature expression of various viewpoints. I am not using a straw man copy of the evolutionary theory, and I am also not using a straw man simplistic model of Noah's flood.

I strongly believe that discussing the issues related to the most developed and mature expressions of the positions is the most fruitful. It is easy to find adherents of any position that do so based on limited (often incorrect) information. My impression is that most of the folks that come here and stay are able to comprehend the positions at that type of level, and to recognize their own limitations.

I don't believe that spending time discussing the less mature adherents to any position does any good in determining the elements of truth within that position. In general, I would suggest totally avoiding categorizing a group, whether it is TEs or creationists, or people with glowing teeth -- as having one or another set of characteristics. It does nothing to help the real discussions - which are to "sharpen" each other as we together seek the truth -- especially if we hold different points of view.