Over at Quintessence of Dust, Steve Matheson raises some good points about Behe. Steve’s argument boils down to the following:
“Behe’s fans say that he’s a nice guy, and that the evolutionists are "crucifying" him. Both claims seem to be true, but they can’t hide some serious problems with his conduct as a scientist.” These problems are …
A. “Behe exudes an arrogant contempt for the scientific community, exemplified by his neglect of peer review.”
B. “I find many of Behe’s responses to his critics to be suspiciously misleading, and I believe this provides a clue as to why he does not allow comments on his blog or participate in professional discussion of his proposals.”
Of course, Steve’s two points above are exemplified by the whole ID movement; one could swap Dembski, Meyer or Wells for Behe and not alter the truth of the statements one iota. They are all defending what Matheson terms “folk science.”
Wander over and read the whole post. This part in particular made me smile:
Behe has excused himself from the company of those who seriously study evolutionary science, and has done this by approaching the complex and fascinating analysis of evolutionary genetics with a malignant combination of arrogant condescension and pitiful ignorance. (Or, alternatively, his integrity has been somehow compromised.) You see, it actually doesn’t matter how you couch your words when the message to an entire field of science (about which you know relatively little) is: "Hey, guys, give it up; I just figgered the whole thing out." In fact, in my opinion, there’s something pretty creepy about a bland smile on the face of an undistinguished biochemist who claims to have overturned a century of work by some of the best minds in the history of biology.
For those that don’t know, Matheson is a developmental cell biologist at Calvin College and makes no attempt to hide his Christian beliefs. It looks like he will be following up the post with another arguing that “Some of Behe’s defenders think that he has effectively answered his critics. He has not, nor has he understood or acknowledged the most important criticisms of his crude claims.”