rationalskepticism.org

PT's Ichythic wrote:(M)aybe he should have spent the last five years reading those 50+ books and journal articles that he admited to never having read…

strangely enough, it looks like he has finally gotten that message.

did you read his last published paper?

no, I didn’t either, but evidently while some of his conclusions, of course, are entirely delusional, people involved with microbial genetics and evolution feel he was indeed spot on in calling for more research looking into the evolution of novel traits.

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress[…]ies-to-behe/

so, this time at least, Behe DID take the time out to peruse the lit, DID notice some areas that needed more research, and only then tried to stuff his god into those gaps.

Is that progress?

maybe he’s trying to actually get interested in doing real science again.

We’ll see if his religious delusions keep getting in the way.

Behe’s implicit conclusion was that evolution in nature—and not just in bacteria and viruses, but all species—also occurred in this way; that is, brand-new genes or genetic elements (he calls them “FCTs”) could not originate de novo by mutation and natural selection, but had to be put there by the Intelligent Designer (aka God/Jebus). Behe did not, and could not, say this in the paper, but intelligent-design advocates certainly touted this conclusion (see here and here, for instance), and now Behe himself has said the same thing on his blog at Uncommon Descent:

Behe wrote:. . . I was saying that, no matter what causes gain-of-FCT events to sporadically arise in nature (and I of course think the more complex ones likely resulted from deliberate intelligent design http://tinyurl.com/32n64xl), short-term Darwinian evolution will be dominated by loss-of-FCT, which is itself an important, basic fact about the tempo of evolution.

Note that here he doesn‘t limit this conclusion (which he conveniently omitted from the QRB paper) to bacteria and viruses.