Behe's Darwin's Black Box
Evolutionists, who pretend entropy doesn't bother them, must now pretend Michael Behe doesn't either ["Meeting Darwin's Wager," Apr. 28]. They assume improbable events happen given eons of time, touting those eons rather than credible detail. Behe's chemical challenge turns the tables, putting time on his side mathematically: If the events evolution requires have very nearly zero probability, then more time passing makes evolution less likely. (Churning Behe's mousetrap parts in a washing machine doesn't make them more nearly assembled the longer you do it.) Truly "irreducibly complex" events by definition have zero chance of happening with any frequency that matters, prompting Crick, the DNA discoverer, to conclude the necessity of intelligent design. The genius of both Behe's and Phillip Johnson's arguments is that they require Darwinists (and theistic evolutionists) to put up or shut up. Too bad the pope's writers weren't as lucid as Behe.

Howard J. Bartlett
Casselberry, Fla.

* Though I appreciate men like Behe and Phillip Johnson (whose book I recently studied), I sometimes wonder about the goal of research attempting to validate God. Should any converts be made to the "Intelligent Design" side, you still have not invited anyone into the kingdom. How ironic that all of this research could be encapsulated in 34 words by the apostle Paul: "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse" [Rom. 1:20, NASB].

Edward Dolan
Greeley, Colo.

I applaud CT for selecting Michael Behe's book, Darwin's Black Box, as its Book of the Year. I also see a danger ...