I'm offended by Islam

[Mystic]

That's the thing. Gradual steps suggest small changes. Small changes happen when it works best at each small stage. Each small stage has to be leading towards a whole system change. ie. little things that detect light towards a complicated system.

Let's talk about the mouse trap analogy because it's more simple. You have various parts right. But if they don't work together, then we have problem. It's useless.

You can talk about there being wooden planks on the ground in nature (analogy) but it doesn't mean the step of adding some useless parts that will lead eventually to a system of parts that is useful is possible. However, if it's guided by a designer, it can very well happen, because there is purpose.

Ah this is were I can help you out, yes on its own a mouse trap needs it parts to work but all of the components for it could have been used for many other things, like the wooden board could have been a door stop or the spring used to make a childs toy or the metal bar used for a mini football post, but instead they were used for a mousetrap as it was a design that was simple and effective, there were probably a few prototypes before the most efficient design was made (although those prototypes may now have a new porpose), inface some parts of creates have been used for something else or had a seconadry purpose with had a unexpected adavatage. Also as time goes on the design well get more effiance and new designs will be made but it all would have desended from that first 'design'. Your thinking that everything is not connected, were everything is and your ignoring the predecessors that came before and that each compent may have had a different job before coming together in that mouse trap.

But that's not how it appears in nature. It appears more analogous to the mouse trap example. That each part has a purpose, and not a bunch of unconnected purposes.

I know what your saying, and Michael Behe addresses this. The problem is the direction. You need direction. You can't have something be useful at one thing, and another thing being useful at another thing, and somehow they are heading towards being connected to a system, they will work better at what they are good at and develop towards that, and not be heading towards a system, and this many many many things working together...not just a few. There is no mechanism by naturalism model leading towards that. How does natural selection make it head towards a system, as opposed to keep improving what each part is good at (when they weren't a system)?

At the very least, science still gives us the appearance of design.

---

What I mean by system, is ofcourse, a very complex machine, with various parts working to do one thing. If they were meant to do other things, why are they heading towards working together as a very complicated machine and function. Natural selection and mutations doesn't account for that. Only purposeful design guided mechanism can account for that. At least that is the way it seems to me.

Skipping that explanation, and show various steps doesn't solve the issue.