I truly appreciate your post and will take all of it to heart. It points
out a critical aspect of this debate that I had not previously considered,
and makes clear (to me, at any rate) why Tom Moore and I seem to be talking
right past each other. I'm not sure that I would concede *quite* as much
authority as you do to scientific intuition - but then again, you're a
scientist (I assume), and I'm not. One *does* tend to favor one's own
discipline. ;-)
In that regard, I would add that, IMO, Thomas Kuhn's thinking may also be
pertinent here. That is, that scientists, as a group, are as inherently
biased as any other segment of society (yes, including tax accountants),
and will generally cling to the accepted paradigm to the bitter end.
(Actually, I have stated in the past that I believe that
_The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions_ should be required reading for
all specialists, even though probably 80% of it is balderdash. The other
20% is dead on.)
I particularly appreciate your irenic tone. I seem to be constitutionally
incapable of anything less than bombastic. In other words, I have a birth
defect; I don't know what Tom's excuse is. ;-)
Just to satisfy my own curiosity: do you have the same appreciation for the
scientific intuition of the contributors to _The_Creation_Hypothesis_
(Ross, Meyer, Bradley, Thaxton, Dembski, et al), that you have for Mike
Behe?
Chuck
-------------------------------------------------------------
Chuck Warman
cwarman@sol.wf.net
"The abdication of Belief / Makes the Behavior small."
--- Emily Dickinson