Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8924 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-17-2019 11:00 PM
23 online now:
Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus) (1 member, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 859,867 Year: 14,903/19,786 Month: 1,626/3,058 Week: 404/868 Day: 43/70 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Irreducible Complexity, Information Loss and Barry Hall's experiments
Posts: 5296
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 2.4

Message 73 of 136 (515133)
07-15-2009 5:35 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Peepul
07-15-2009 9:32 AM

Re: Logic and reality please.
If a system can be shown to have evolved by a series of step changes (which is what the above demonstrates) then by definition it is NOT IC

Those who are attempting to push IC have been careful not to define IC as "cannot evolve by a series of step changes". So your statement is wrong.

What they have done is assume that IC systems, defined in various other ways, cannot evolve. So if they demonstrate that a system is IC by whatever definition they use, that leads to the conclusion that is cannot have evolved.

Hall's experiments demonstrated that a system that is IC by Behe's original definition can evolve.

That's one reason Behe changed his definition to one for which it is impossible to figure out if a sytem is IC.

Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Peepul, posted 07-15-2009 9:32 AM Peepul has not yet responded

Posts: 5296
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 2.4

Message 74 of 136 (515134)
07-15-2009 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by traderdrew
07-15-2009 12:31 PM

Re: Sticking to the topic/s, and avoiding deceptions.
It is because in the random world of neo-Darwinism, a single mutation would have to be preserved by natural selection. So what are the chances of two or more ("complimentary or coherent") mutations that can occur at pinpoint areas of the informational areas of DNA or proteins of occurring? The odds start to greatly decrease when you have to simultaneous mutations. And what about three or more? I wouldn't say that it is impossible. The mutations have to be integrated and provide specific functions. So if the odds start to become astoundingly great, how can neo-Darwinism explain a severely IC system?

Look up "neutral drift" and be prepared to change your first sentence.

Please provide an operational definition of "severely IC", and give two examples.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by traderdrew, posted 07-15-2009 12:31 PM traderdrew has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019