> George, in my exchanges with the ID folks (how I wish you had been at
> the
> NTSE!), I have not observed the above as their assertion. Johnson put
> it
> well at the NTSE when he said that the ID work would, if successful,
> make
> science more "theistic friendly," but that's all. I happen to disagree
> with Phil on this -- I see it opening science to potential abuse, but
> I
> think I have an open mind on the issue. I see ID, if it has value,
> and
> it may well have value, as not needing in any way to appeal to the
> supernatural -- only to intelligences outside of humanity. That's all.
>
At the ASA meeting at Bethel in 1996, Mike Behe told some of us
at lunch that he was pushing ID for apologetic reasons. He may have
changed his mind by now. When I told Phil Johnson this in Minneapolis
in October, he couldn't believe me.
> Jim Behnke, Asbury College, Wilmore, KY 40390
> james.behnke@asbury.edu