Comments on: Michael Behe’s Amazon Blog

By: Jonathan Sarfati

Jonathan Sarfati — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 02:24:33 +0000

Dr Don Batten of CMI defended Dr Behe against a critic of his blog at An information-gaining mutation in HIV?.

By: Apollos

Apollos — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:22:02 +0000

More today on Behe's blog covering his cage match with Coyne. He's posted 2 out of 3 parts of his response to Coyne's objections. Behe currently has Coyne in a headlock, and is delivering the dreaded noogie.

By: DonaldM

DonaldM — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 14:57:12 +0000

John Kwok revealed in one post that he hasnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t even read the book.

A Dawinist commenting on a book they haven’t read??!!! Unthinkable!! Stop the presses!!
Why, I never!!!!

By: jerry

jerry — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 14:37:07 +0000

There is a phenomena that deserves a name but it is “the last post wins.”

If one is having an exchange on the intenet with someone or are responding to a point raised by another, they are often essentially unresponsive to what you say even if you address their issues. Then if you decide to stop, they will then post and say you have been beaten. They fail to realize that the more adult behavior is to stop participatation in their foolishness.

In their minds if they post last then they have felt they have won or if someone does not respond to their inanity, they will also proclaim that they have won the argument. There is also a premium on cleverness or the art of the put down as self delusions that they have won.

By: kairos

kairos — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 09:10:17 +0000

I’ve seen on the Amazon site that Allen is answering in a angry way too. Who is this nige guy?

By: IDist

IDist — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 07:40:49 +0000

The problem with John Kwok and people like him is that they think they are important and credible. It is really funny because they apparently think that their attacks on Behe’s book requires a response from him, and they’re so convinced that they’d refuted the book. They view the fact that Behe simply ignored them as “intellectual dishonesty” and a proof that Behe doesn’t care about science.
That’s hilarious.

By: SeekAndFind

SeekAndFind — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 03:46:47 +0000

RE:

—————
John Kwak and other Darwinists are just spamming his blog with trash.
————–

Is it John Kwak, John Kwok or John Quack ?

By: russ

russ — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 02:15:52 +0000

John Kwok revealed in one post that he hasn’t even read the book.

By: GilDodgen

GilDodgen — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 01:22:16 +0000

John Kwak and other Darwinists are just spamming his blog with trash.

These guys are doing Behe a favor without realizing it, because they are betraying panic and desperation in the face of evidence and well-reasoned argumentation.

By: nemesis

nemesis — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:53:19 +0000

Here’s what I got from the reviews:
1. ID is dressed up creationism.
2. Kwok is condescending.
3. The type III secretory system proves IC wrong.
4. Dawkins feels bad for Behe
5. ID is unscientific
6. Dawkins should have gotten a Ph.D in English rather than biology.
7. A scientific renegade (Behe) is wrong simply because he is in the minority (courtesy of Dawkins).
I ended up learning more about the character of Darwinists than Behe.