Gert Korthof reviews Behe’s latest book “The Edge of Evolution” and shows a level of internal contradiction one has grown accustomed to from ID proponents
Common Descent is based on genetic continuity in the history of life on earth. Design, according to Michael Behe, is based on genetic discontinuities in the Tree of Life. Therefore, Design and Common Descent are not compatible. Make your choice: it is either Design or Common Descent. Contrary to Behe, both cannot be true.
Korthof shows how Behe’s book does little to explain ‘Intelligent Design’, leaving it once again scientifically vacuous.
More recently I listened to Behe talk about intelligent design, suggesting that the design instance could very well be moved to the moment of ‘creation’. Such a self defeating move was in fact predicted by such visionaries as Wesley Elsberry and others. If natural law and chance can in fact explain the evolution of life after the instance of ‘creation’, then ID has made itself irrelevant and yet ID also argues that there are ‘edges’ which evolution cannot explain and which would require some intervention. However at the same time it also suggests that such interventions may not be needed but then there are no edges left to evolution. This fascinating self contradiction is what lies at the foundation as to why Intelligent Design has remained scientifically vacuous.