http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity
The Blood Clotting Agents (Behe's cascade analogy), the IC Eye and Flagellum arguments are easily refuted. Behe's mousetrap Analogy fails as well. Behe's Irreducible Complexity is based on a deliberate misunderstanding of biochemical processes. On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Kris Sisk <[email protected]> wrote: > >>The problem with Irreducible Complexity is that it assume that the only >>function of all the parts of the complex object is for what the complex >>object is used for. >> >>It seems to ignore that the individual parts, while offering no benefit >>in their current purpose, could have been used for something else. > > Eh...right...that's like saying you dropped a laptop and the CPU suddenly > became a GPU for no reason. > > Even if the individual parts of a complex mechanism evolved elsewhere in the > cell they'd still have to join together in a single generation or natural > selection would weed the useless changes out. If you're talking about a > simple mechanism composing of just a few parts that might be acceptable. The > normal example, however, is the bacterial flagellum (and yes I realize I > probably just butchered the spelling) which has over 40 individual parts. > Even if you give it a half dozen generations that gets to be far fetched. > > Frankly when presented with irreducible complexity vs co-option (that's the > term that argument was given when I first heard it) I've always thought that > co-option sounded like someone grasping at straws for an explaination that > didn't involve some outside force. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:315893 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
