The May 30 issue of The New Yorker features an article by H. Allen Orr on the Intelligent Design (ID) movement. Orr is, as one might expect, not convinced by the ID critique of Darwnism. The article offers familiar critiques of the work of Michael Behe and William Dembski, who as of June 1st joins my faculty at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. The one telling piece of The New Yorker article is the concession that the Darwinist “policy of limited scientific engagement” with ID has failed. Clearly, the “if we ignore it, it will go away” strategy of the peer reviewed journals is a losing one.
Article
