I didn't understand your comments.I don't know what the problem is, irreducible complexity is a minimum number of parts. Specified complexity is more like defining the various parts if I'm getting the right idea here. I don't know what your getting at her Frumious, am I missing something?
Irreducible complexity isn't about a minimum number of parts, it's about the presence of a number of interacting parts that supply some function, where the function ceases with the removal of any part. The idea is that step-wise evolution can't result in irreducible complexity because there's no function until the last step is completed. This has the generic flaw that step-wise assembly can involve more components than appear in the final structure, e.g. refinement by removal of components. Specific instances may also be shown to be incorrectly assessed, e.g. the mousetrap.
Specified complexity is a property that identifies patterns that have concise (i.e. 'specified') descriptions that are unlikely to arise by chance (i.e. they're 'complex'). The idea is that natural processes are only likely to produce concise patterns that are simple, or complex patterns that are lengthy or messy. This has the flaw that it assumes natural processes are just random.
I couldn't see how your comments were relevant to this.
Upvote
0