Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,425 Year: 3,682/9,624 Month: 553/974 Week: 166/276 Day: 6/34 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Irreducible Complexity SPELLS the END of Darwinism
SweetLou
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 3 (175059)
01-08-2005 3:41 PM


In Michael Behe's relatively new book it talks about his theory Irreducibly Complex systems (Ie- Cell division, protiene production, sight, Ammune system, ect...). Now my question I'm posing to all the Darwinists is as followes. Lets say a mouse trap is what I call a irreducibly complex system meaning in my oppinion you cannot create it by small sucessive adaptations without totally wrecking and rendering the device un-useable as a mouse killing device. So my question to you is try showing how the mouse trap can evolve from one simple form to a full fledged mouse killing machine ie modern mouse trap. As you soon may find out is that its quite hard..well down right impossible to do this so how can you believe a theory that cannot even put together a simple mouse trap????
http://www.arn.org/docs/behe/mb_mousetrapdefended.htm full article talking about his theory and the problems with Darwinsm.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminIRH, posted 01-08-2005 4:07 PM SweetLou has not replied
 Message 3 by AdminNosy, posted 01-08-2005 6:05 PM SweetLou has not replied

AdminIRH
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 3 (175064)
01-08-2005 4:07 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by SweetLou
01-08-2005 3:41 PM


Hello SweetLou, welcome to EvCForum!
You may want to do a forum search for irreducible complexity and intelligent design, as I'm sure that the topic has been covered before. Either that or Michael Behe's work has been discussed already.
Feel free to resurrect any topic you find if you have something to add to the debate. Read as much as possible - you may find that your point has been covered before. Look in the "Is it Science" forum in particular.
As always, I hope you enjoy your time here.
AdminIRH


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by SweetLou, posted 01-08-2005 3:41 PM SweetLou has not replied

AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 3 of 3 (175079)
01-08-2005 6:05 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by SweetLou
01-08-2005 3:41 PM


Existing threads - Rejected, closed 4/26/05
Behe on organismal evolution
This one was moved to bootcamp. We can move it out of there now if you want to use it.
The Argument from Design: Design for who?
ID as Religion
Meyer's Hopeless Monster
Stonehenge and Irreducible Complexity
Behe's Irreducible Complexity Is Refuted
Are someothers that you might want to scan through. If you still want to carry on with this topic (which has totally been discussed before) just say so.
If you read carefully you will find that the mousetrap analogy fails very quickly.
{Rejected and closed 4/26/05 - Adminnemooseus}
This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 04-26-2005 02:49 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by SweetLou, posted 01-08-2005 3:41 PM SweetLou has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024