Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
Location: In perpetual bliss, so long as I'm with Jess.
Posts: 1,095
Blessings: 34,793
Reps: 617 (power: 0)
The funny thing is that I remember Darwin himself refuting IC in his Origin of Species... I think he called it something different, though.
__________________ Lung transplant: $500K. Rejection drugs: $25k/year. Being denied a life-saving operation because "it would be too risky": Priceless. Read about my bizarre fight with the healthcare bureaucrats at Save-Allan.org!
gentu - Bacterial Flagellum
MartinM - if Behe is the freshest you've read on the subject, you are behind the times. Please read my aforementioned file (that I recommended to Pete) on this thread
Arikay - I guess it comes down to the reading (again, like you on both sides of the table) leaving no other choice. Dembski has provided sound arguments against the possibility of evolution with a lot of his writings, to the note of which Miller, Pigliucci and others have done little to counter.
Yes, I understand they are different things. Abiogenesis. Good catch. But once you infer intelligent design, the argument becomes theological..."Who is the designer."
Today at 05:08 PM NebraskaMan said this in Post #15
Pete, the information at the link I just gave should answer your question of If not, let me know and I will gladly work to accomodate your knowledge appetite!
I went through it (well, skipping parts that seemed irrelevant), but didn't get an answer to my question.
Dembski brings up the flagellum, but doesn't actually assert how we we know it exhibits "specified complexity", other than to assert that since biologists haven't figured out exactly how it evolved, therefore it must be too complex to have evolved.
Gentu, scratch my comment...I was typing before reading and clicking before thinking. I have to leave now, but I will post an answer after I get home later tonight.
But the thing is, that if ID is about how life started, or how the universe started, then it doesnt do a thing to harm evolution, as evolution really doesnt care how things got here.
Today at 02:41 PM NebraskaMan said this in Post #25
Yes, I understand they are different things. Abiogenesis. Good catch. But once you infer intelligent design, the argument becomes theological..."Who is the designer."
So, evolution is science of the gaps? "We can't explain things here, here, here and here which are necessary to our evolutionary theory, but that doesn't damage our theory!" What?
Anyway, as for the bacterial flagellum, how can evolution theory explain its emergence? It can't!
Even the simplest bacterial flagellum requires around forty proteins for its assembly and structure. All of these proteins are necessary in the sense that lacking any of them, a working flagellum does not result.
-- dembski
This isn't God of the gaps, this is the fact, that if evolution theory (including natural selection) cannot account for the emergence of each and every organism, it fails! Darwin himself said
If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.
Please note the word any in his quote, and then explain how you allow the theory to still stand.
[b]Today at 03:55 PM NebraskaMan said this in Post #29
So, evolution is science of the gaps? "We can't explain things here, here, here and here which are necessary to our evolutionary theory, but that doesn't damage our theory!" What?
Becuase it isn't about evolution or biology, it's about physics and chemistry...
Linear Mode
