From: rokimoto557@gmail.com   
      
   On 10/30/2025 4:20 AM, jillery wrote:   
   > On Tue, 28 Oct 2025 10:02:42 -0500, RonO    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 10/28/2025 4:27 AM, jillery wrote:   
   >>> On Mon, 27 Oct 2025 13:35:33 -0500, RonO    
   >>> wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 10/26/2025 2:56 AM, jillery wrote:   
   >>>>> On Fri, 24 Oct 2025 08:24:20 -0500, RonO    
   >>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On 10/24/2025 4:00 AM, jillery wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On Thu, 23 Oct 2025 08:44:00 -0500, RonO    
   >>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> On 10/23/2025 3:35 AM, jillery wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On Tue, 21 Oct 2025 14:49:18 -0500, RonO    
   >>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 10/21/2025 10:20 AM, Pro Plyd wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> RonO wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/18/2025 4:48 AM, jillery wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 17 Oct 2025 19:59:15 -0600, Pro Plyd   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> jillery wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 16 Oct 2025 22:54:09 +0100, Ernest Major   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 16/10/2025 19:24, RonO wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Early in the ID scam I recall that Behe and Phillip Johnson   
   were   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed to have had ties to Christian reconstructionist   
   groups, but   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that association is no longer mentioned, though Phillip   
   Johnson was   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed to be instrumental in securing funding from Ahmanson   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (noted to   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be associated with Christian reconstruction).   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Behe is a Catholic. One would not expect Catholics to have   
   ties to   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Reconstructionist groups. One rather would expect them to be   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opposed to   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Reconstructionism.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An irony is Kenneth R. Miller also identifies as Catholic, yet   
   is a   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vocal and voluminous critic of ID and Michael Behe's   
   Irreducible   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Complexity.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But apparently not practicing catholics?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Not clear what your question means.  My understanding is in the   
   U.S.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> there is a schism among members similar to a schism in the   
   general   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> population, between political/social conservatives and   
   progressives.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> How an individual identifies depends on the specific Church   
   teachings   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> they prioritize.  Based on what I have read what Behe and   
   Miller have   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> written, I would guess Miller is more progressive, while Behe is   
   more   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> conservative.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Both claim to attend Mass regularly.  I recall one of the ID   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> documentaries had a video clip of Miller taking Communion.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Ah. Was curious if it was catholic-in-name-only, like just   
   >>>>>>>>>>> listing a religious preference on a form but not actually   
   >>>>>>>>>>> practicing. The church and pope had some time ago moved   
   >>>>>>>>>>> to neutral ground as regards to evolution etc   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Both Behe and Miller accept biological evolution as a fact of   
   nature,   
   >>>>>>>>>> but Miller understands that the ID scam was never science, and has   
   been   
   >>>>>>>>>> against it for that reason from the start.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Ron Okimoto   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Point of Order:  Behe's concept of biological evolution incorporates   
   >>>>>>>>> ID, which presumes conscious and supernatural intervention, and so is   
   >>>>>>>>> neither science nor biological; he might as well accept YEC. To say   
   >>>>>>>>> Behe accepts biological evolution requires a disingenuous   
   >>>>>>>>> contradiction of terms.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Behe's designer is a tweeker.  He claims that his designer is   
   >>>>>>>> responsible for some of the evolution like evolving the flagellum.  IC   
   >>>>>>>> failed but his 3 neutral mutations within a given period of time in   
   one   
   >>>>>>>> lineage depends on descent with modification and the accumulation of   
   >>>>>>>> those neutral mutations within Behe's time limit.  So Behe requires   
   >>>>>>>> descent with modification.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Behe requires descent with *conscious* modification, and those   
   >>>>>>> modifications are by his own definition *supernatural*, which makes   
   >>>>>>> them *not* biological and *not* science.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> As I said Behe is a Tweeker, and tweeking doesn't have to occur in all   
   >>>>>> cases of evolution.  Behe is the one that has claimed that the   
   >>>>>> "devolution" of whales from terrestrial mammals is what is expected to   
   >>>>>> occur by Darwinian mechanisms with no designer required.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> "Tweeking" isn't the problem here.  That's just another word for   
   >>>>> artificial selection.  We humans have practiced it for millenia.  The   
   >>>>> problem with Behe's "tweeking" is that he insists his "tweeks" are   
   >>>>> *supernatural* and selected by a *supernatural* agent, and so *not*   
   >>>>> biological and *not* science.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Behe's "devolution" is double-talk, as much biological evolution aka   
   >>>>> descent with modification as are his so-called IC examples.  Whales   
   >>>>> aren't just land mammals with a few pieces missing.  Land mammals   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)