I would note that his diatribe contains not a shred of evidence that Wikipedia’s characterisation of the scientific community’s reception of DBB as being extremely negative is incorrect.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@Eddie’s fallacious tone policing/tone argument/tone trolling is noted.
By way of reply, given the number of times that Behe has been proven wrong on everything from Blood Clotting to Philosophy of Science to Virology to Malaria to good Courtroom Practice (and probably dozens of of other issues), it would seem permissible to call Behe an “ignorant old twit” for his serial incompetence on issues directly relevant to his claims.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
What I think is “appropriate” is to point out that @Eddie has provided no evidence of Dr Smith’s “arrogance”, he just expects us to take his word for it. The fact that very few of us would trust his opinion any further than we could spit him doesn’t seem to influence his deranged histrionics in the slightest.
On the other hand, I have repeatedly provided evidence of Behe’s incompetence.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
To summarise:
-
Eddie has failed to provide any evidence that the Wikipedia article was factually incorrect.
-
Eddie has failed to provide any evidence that the scientific community’s negative assessment of DBB, or Behe’s work more generally, was factually incorrect.
-
Eddie has failed to provide any evidence that Dr Abbie Smith’s evisceration of Behe’s HIV claims was factually incorrect.
All else is simply hot air and fallacy.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
&
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
&