he overlooks the existence of chloroquine-resistant strains of malaria lacking one of the mutations he claims to be essential (at position 220).Incorrect.
Although some other mutations in some other proteins are thought to contribute to chloroquine resistance, none are nearly as effective as that in PfCRT. EoE p.62Now, was what Behe actually said correct or not? That is a much more interesting question.
Behe waves away evidence suggesting that chloroquine resistance may be the result of sequential, not simultaneous, mutationsDoes he disregard sequential mutations?
"More rarely, several mutations can sequentially add to each other to improve an organism's chances of survival. An example is the breaking of the regulatory controls of fetal hemoglobin to help alleviate sickle cell disease." EoE p.101And the implication was that this was more likely than simultaneous
"Very, very rarely, several amino acid mutations appear simultaneously to confer a beneficial effect, such as in chloroquine resistance with mutant PfCRT." cont.I have yet to see any attempt to determine what evolution could achieve from the anti-ID side. So who's doing the science here? Those people that are trying to tease out the implications of how evolution might work? Or those people who just sit there picking holes and sneering? Perhaps the opponents of ID could give reasons why AFGP's have appeared in notothenioid fish and yet malaria parasites require a warm climate - Behe has given his.