hatsoff
New member
Clete said:If any one part of a bat's sonar system is missing the whole damn thing is worthless and the bat runs slap-bang into every tree it gets near and is completely unable to feed itself.
Sure, but that's not how evolution works. Bats did not come into being by starting with one part, then adding another, another and so on until the whole bat was ready to go. Evolution involves complex changes and subtractions, not just simple additions.
If a single tiny little piece of a bacterial flagellum isn't present performing its function flawlessly, the bacterium is immobilized and the flagellum is a big fat waste of biological resources which took 30 interacting proteins to build and 20 more to help assemble every one of which was essential to the task.
The bacterial flagellum is a unique organism because it was specifically cited by Behe, along with two other biological systems, as being irreducibly complex. Behe has since been proven wrong in both of the other cases. The bacterial flagellum remains a mystery at the moment, but a few models have been proposed which have some promise. Of course, it should be stressed that just because we don't know exactly *how* a system evolved doesn't mean that it didn't evolve.
If any minute part of the blood pressure regulatory system in the head of a giraffe stops functioning all the blood vessels in the giraffe's head go POP the first time it bends over to take a drink.
See above about bats.
THIS IS WHY THEY CALL THE SYSTEMS IRREDUCIBLY COMPLEX!!!!
Only a few fringe scientists--all of whom just happen to be Christians (or subscribe to some other creationist religion)--have called any biological system irreducibly complex. Mainstream science rejects the idea in favor of evolution.
It means that the systems are complex (in some cases wildly so) but are at the same time as simple as they can possibly be and still function AT ALL.
Few if any organisms are as simple as they could possibly be. The human body is a perfect example, with our hair, wisdom teeth and appendix, among other needless biological devices.
If a biological system does not function then it gives no survival advantage to the organism and thus no way for natural selection to preserve the non-functioning system.
Natural selection involves more than just "survival advantage." In any case, evolution does not usually allow for non-functioning systems, though it does for non-functioning components.
A flagellum that is only partly there is totally invisible to natural selection and thus evolution cannot account for any such irreducibly complex biological system.
Again, it is not irreducibly complex.
It's not that it hasn't explained it YET, it's that it CANNOT explain it - period. The whole nature of evolutionary theory would actual predict that no such system exists, which is a point that Darwin spent some considerable amount of time talking about and even went so far as to say that if any such system where found in nature that it would falsify his theory. The problem is that modern science simply tweaks whatever part of either the evidence or the theory it needs to tweak in order for the problem to go away and have thus turned Evolution into an unfalsifiable religion instead of science.
Again, you're making unfounded conspiracy claims. Scientists don't ignore ID or IC, they discredit it.
Last edited: