Behe's Irreducible Complexity Is Refuted

John Paul!Nice to see you again!Perhaps we can continue our discussion of how Noah could have stored enough food and fresh water to feed a pair of small horses on the Ark.I know it's been a while, but I have since obtained my very own copy of Woodmoreappe's book, so you can feel free to reference it as much as you like.See you there!

So, JohnPaul, how can I tell the difference between a Intelligently-Designed system and a natural one that we do not currently understand, and may not have the intelligence to ever understand?

quote:

---

If you have the book (Noah's Ark:A Feasibility Study) you don't need me.

---

Well, I find the book quite lacking in specifics.Are you sure you don't want to tell me why the book is right?

quote:

---

We would use the design explanatory filter as a starting point.

---

Can you give a step-by-step example of a as-yet not understood system which has been determined by this filter to be ID?

quote:

---

If what comes out is a design inference then that is our starting assumption- that the object of our observation was the preoduct of ID.

---

What I don't understand is how it is that this assumption can ever be made, because there could always be the possibility that we just haven't developed the technology to understand the system yet, or perhaps we just haven't thought of how it could be a natural system even though it is, or that we will never, ever be smart enough to figure it out.Just because we aren't smart enough to figure out how a system is natural doesn't mean that a God did anythin.It just means we don't know.How can you know for sure?

quote:

---

Then research would either support or falsify that inference. To falsify ID all that needs to be done is to show that purely natural processes is all that is required to produce that object.

---

But what if we just can never figure it out?Not knowing how something works isn't positive evidence for anything.

quote:

---

So far no one has shown that purely natural processes can account for CSI/ SC or IC.

---

But a lack of evidence for something is not evidence FOR anything.It just means that we don't know.Oh, and IC systems have certainly been shown to come about by natural processes.Ever seen a stone arch?

quote:

---

Ya see we INFER an IDer by the observable data.

---

No, you don't.You conclude ID from a lack of evidence.Big, big, big difference.