Yeah, I know he doesnt read this blog. I know ID Creationists (Creationists in general) appear not to know this blog exists, if my troll traffic is any indication.
But I cannot ignore Behes continually baffling assertions about HIV.
Hes doing it again.
WORLD: You write that "HIV has killed millions of people, fended off the human immune system, and become resistant to whatever drug humanity could throw at it. Yet through all that, there have been no significant basic biochemical changes in the virus at all." Why is that significant in the debate over Darwin?
BEHE: Like malaria, HIV is a microbe that occurs in astronomical numbers. What's more, its mutation rate is 10,000 times greater than that of most other organisms. So in just the past few decades HIV has actually undergone more of certain kinds of mutations than all cells have endured since the beginning of the world. Yet all those mutations, while medically important, have changed the functioning virus very little. It still has the same number of genes that work in the same way. There is no new molecular machinery. If we see that Darwin's mechanism can only do so little even when given its best opportunities, we can decisively conclude that random mutation did not build the machinery of life.
Behe, here are my questions:
- What do you want HIV to do?
- What would constitute a 'change in functioning'?
- What would constitute 'new molecular machinery'?
And though Ive sworn off low hanging fruit-- If a professional respected Creationist like Behe wants to give me an easy target, Ill happily snatch it:
Yet all those mutations, while medically important, have changed the functioning virus very little. It still has the same number of genes that work in the same way.Lets pretend HIV is 'hasnt changed'-- Behe just said 'If humans evolved from monkeys, why there still be monkeys?' 'If HIV mutates so much, how come it aint evolved into a cat yet?'
Ahh its Creationism, not HIV, that hasnt evolved any new tricks in the past 30 years.