Irreducible Complexity.

[CoxRox]

Hi Catherine,

If a God is responsible for the laws of physics, mathematics, life, a human eye, all things which I believe infer a designer, then I trust this designer knew what He/She was doing.

This basically puts you back to your "The lord works in mysterious ways" argument. I don't know why it did it like that, but I trust it had a good reason for it.

How is that an answer?

Well, we have a sort of answer in that we know some of the 'why' in how the eye works. All the links we've been posting on the eye show how incredible it is and what a good job it does. I can't see how it doesn't do what it is 'designed' for?? We could have had three eyes, one in the middle but we don't. I'm sorry my answer isn't very scientific. I think they did a good job. Not only do they work very well, they look beautiful.

Many of the objections to the structure of the eye have been explained and we can see that there are good reasons for the wiring etc being the way it is.

Do we really? The way I see it (no pun intended) is that its remarkable that we have as good eyesight as we do, not thanks to the designer but inspite of the designer, should one really have existed. Just because it works, doesn't make the reason for doing it this way a good one, in fact its a very silly one.

[/b] All the articles I've read on the eye, show me that it works very well and is 'remarkable'[/b]. Maybe I'm not understanding these articles. [b]

And then there is your site that pulls this one out of its hat*:

How can one place any significant probability on the origin of life apart from intelligent design, when up to ninety percent of present U. S. scientists seem to be shifting toward some variation of intelligent design ?

This I want to see hard evidence of.

*euphemism

[b]This quote seems incorrect to me. I will look into it. [b]

---

Leo, I hope you can see my answers ok. They haven't all come out in bold. Sorry.