Title: As "scientific" as astrology
Product review: In this book Michael Behe claims to present a scientific argument, by his own definition of "scientific".However, under oath on the witness stand in Kitzmiller v. Dover (2005), Behe admitted that by his definition, ASTROLOGY is also "scientific".So why pay for this book, when you could turn to your newspaper's horoscopes and get something just as "scientific" at a much lower price?
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
