Intelligent Design as good as Astrology

Intelligent Design proponent Michael Behe, giving testimony yesterday, agreed that astrology would be considered a scientific theory if judged by the same standards as he wished Intelligent Design to be judged. (Via Rockstar’s Ramblings and elsewhere. Btw, see Rockstar’s ID exam at the link.)

Actually, I think that’s a little insulting to astrology. Unlike ID, astrology makes testable predictions. Of course, the predictions of astrology fail to correspond with reality, but that’s a separate issue, at least astrology makes predictions and can be tested. ID doesn’t predict anything that I am aware of. Still, it’s interesting to see what Behe includes in his (re)definition of science.

Anyway, via Secular Blasphemy I found this hilarious write-up of the day’s testimony. Behe certainly seems confused about a lot of things, including things that he (Behe) had written or was currently working on:

Every time Rothschild would ask Behe about a statement, some he wrote himself, he'd say he'd have to disagree that it said what it said.

I expected Rothschild to ask Behe whether he was able to read and understand the English language.

At one point during Rothschild's cross-examination, the lawyer asked the scientist whether he was co-authoring a book, a follow-up to "Of Pandas and People," with several other intelligent design moolahs. He said he wasn't.

The lawyer showed him depositions and reports to the court, quoting two of the other authors as saying he was a co-author.

Behe said that he wasn't a co-author of the book but that the statements by those guys weren't false. He said one of the authors was "seeing into the future."

Rothschild asked, "Is seeing into the future one of the powers of the intelligent-design movement?"

Behe didn't answer.

He didn't have to.

Seeing into the future is the province of that other science — you know, astrology.

Michael Behe is Professor of Biological Sciences at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania, and he holds a Ph.D. in Biochemistry. I am unaware of his astrological sign.

Comments

[BronzeDog]

"Unlike ID, astrology makes testable predictions. Of course, the predictions of astrology fail to correspond with reality..."

I res- change that: I disrespect astrologers less than I disrespect IDers: At least astrology is testable (if you can prevent them from making too many excuses) and has some potentially entertaining mythological background. ID's just a big fluffy nothing.

[Phil Plait]

Damn you! I was going to blog about this very topic on Monday! Grrrrr. Oh well, guess I'll follow in your footsteps once again... :-)

[abasedperception]

Nice insightful blogs Skeptico and equally
commendable contributions by other skeptics.

Quoting Robert Pirsig from
"Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance"...
"You never dedicate to something you have complete confidence in. No one is fanatically shouting that the sun is going down tomorrow. They KNOW it's going to rise tomorrow. When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kinds of dogmas or goals, it's always because these
dogmas or goals are in doubt."

[Doug Sharp, Head IDiot]

OPEN EPISTLE TO KANSAS SCHOOL BOARD
November 8th, 2005
I write with joy and thanks in my heart for your bold decision to teach Kansas schoolchildren of The Intelligent Design GOD IDio. Finally, The Church of The Intelligent Designer needs no longer cower behind a façade of science.

Now that your establishment of IDio has rendered the Constitution's first amendment inoperative, we can proudly proclaim in every Kansas classroom, "There is but one Intelligent Designer and His Name is IDio!" Thanks be to the taxpayers of Kansas for donating their money to proselytize for His church. May IDio mutate you all intelligently.

Finally, we see an end to the dark decades of awkward debates, of tedious aping of scientific method, of endless self-publication to mesmerize the faithful. No more need we pay our devout 'scientists' to appear in court, only to be insulted by the IDioless forces of logic. Never again must we shrug uneasily and mumble, "Umdon'tknowbutit'snotagod," when Darwinists ask the identity of the Intelligent Designer.

Spread the word: http://www.godinabox.com

[SL]

Thanks for the back-handed compliment. ;-)

As an astrologer, I would be horrified to see any kind of astrology taught to my children in science classes (except perhaps in the history of sience--where it does belong).

[BronzeDog]

I suspect you're a great deal more honest than most sorts.

As I implied with my previous comment, astrology also tends to be more honest (less dishonest?) than ID. At least astrology has predictions to put on the chopping block, unlike ID, which doesn't have predictions of any sort.