In one paragraph Lents et al. twice cited sources they thought contradicted Behe, and twice suggested he ignored or dismissed contrary evidence.
While discussions of science standards are often couched in bureaucratic-sounding language, the impact of these policies can be profound.
One historian says Darwin’s naturalism came first, and “only later did he find a theory to validate his convictions.”
Would it, in fact, be enlightening if you were to sit a Darwinist and a Darwin skeptic together for an extended period of time to talk and see what really lies at the bottom of their disagreement?
I had someone ask whether, in a previous post, I meant universal common descent (UCD) or more limited common descent.