Expletive Deleted

I just watched the documentary Flock of Dodos: The Evolution-Intelligent Design Circus. I saw Michael J. Behe, an Intelligent Design Creationist, at his duplicitous best. In Flock Behe says that:

No, Intelligent Design isn't a religion, it doesn't depend on any religious presuppositions, any more than your ability to determine that Mount Rushmore was designed is a religious conclusion, or detecting radio messages from outer space, say from some space alien. That wouldn't be a religion either. It's a conclusion based on the physical evidence.

But he also wrote:

So far I have assumed the exitence of God. But what if the existence of God is denited at the outset, or is in dispute? Is the plausibility of the argument to design affected? As a matter of my own experience the answer is clearly yes, the argument is less plausible to those for whom God's existence is in question and is much less plausible for those who deny God's existence.

What if the existence of God is in dispute or is denied? So far I have assumed the existence of God. But what if the existence of God is denied at the outset, or is in dispute? Is the plausibility of the argument to design affected? As a matter of my own experience the answer is clearly yes, the argument is less plausible to those for whom God's existence is in question, and is much less plausible for those who deny God's existence.
(Reply to My Critics, p705. Biology and Philosophy)

I also got to see some of the critics of evolution in the Kansas Board of Education. Kathy Martin, Connie Morris, and John Calvert are portrayed in the most sympathetic light. They're not mendacious liars or uneducated hillbillies, but your everyday people who are merely misinformed by the IDC people and further energized by their blind faith.

It also shows evolutionists as incapable of communicating scientific truths to the public. That is a good criticism, and some sicence-minded people are remedying the situation. I don't know if it'll work. We've had great science writers like Carl Zimmer and Chris Mooney, and pretty good scientist-communicators like the late Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Dawkins; and yet they have not been able to have much impact in the public discourse.

All in all, Flock of Dodos is an eye-opener to the failings of science education and science advocacy. It's a good documentary, and I encourage everyone to watch it.