Tuesday, 27 March 2012

Debunking Corner: Irreducible complexity (again)

How is this for a good ratio of rebuttal to rebutee(?):

To answer this whole page of garbage from uncommon descent you just need the following:


This shows you just how empty the IDCreationist position is.  There are actually several other ways that IC systems can evolve but that one word response seems to fit the arch and knives/glasses examples given.


  1. I'm a scaffolder... I can tell you now that it will not go up without careful planning and all the right types of equipment... This sort of thinking shows zero appreciation of what it takes to build something. And to think I came across this while searching competitors... Are you guys for real? Centre for science... Scaffolding doesn't just appear contrary to the scientific communities considered opinion

  2. Hi Anonymous,

    No body is saying it just appears - it is already there doing a different job but then can go when the IC structure is self supporting. Think of it as an existing structure that provides support as a secondary function by accident.

    Do you want some examples from the literature? Why not look for them yourself - it will be enlightening for you and will perhaps show you how dishonest the ID crowd are being.

    We can recommend some good basic biology courses if you prefer.

    Just because you don't understand something that doesn't mean no one else does.


  3. Dishonest, what nonsense. Is that the best you can muster? Why don't you deal with the argument, it's clear your worldview is getting in your way, but spare us the nauseating pandering. There are people who hold defensible positions that don't agree with you, get over it. With all the posturing, I'm unconvinced that Behe has been proven wrong.

  4. If it is just a matter of worldviews, and you are hinting heavily that this is somehow a case of Christians versus the world, then you have two major problems you need to address:

    1) How come most Christians are perfectly happy to accept the scientific evidence for modern biology and see no conflict between the scientific evidence and their faith?

    2) How come many scientists producing this evidence are religious themselves?

    You own worldview seems to be a conspiracy theory. Ever wondered about that at all?

    Behe himself has admitted his filter gets false positives, which makes it useless.