(April 6, 2013 at 1:42 pm)popeyespappy Wrote: MN, why not get your explanation from the horse’s mouth. The Flagellum Unspun The Collapse of "Irreducible Complexity" is a short article by Kenneth Miller the scientist that testified against irreducible complexity in the Dover trial.
I think he strawman's irreducible complexity. The reason is not that any parts can't be missing like he goes on to prove (like some proteins or whatever) and still function.
I think he either misunderstands the irreducible complexity issue or is purposely strawmanning the argument or perhaps this is because I'm thinking of the particular version of Michael Behe's argument.
It's that there is essential components, not that you can't find some missing parts in some life form that is found in another life form, and therefore you disprove irreducible complexity.
Moreover, as we are discussing in this thread, showing "stage A" and "Stage B" in nature, while reasoning of Michael Behe seems to suggest to me, that going from stage A and Stage B might be impossible due to the fact you have various parts working together and that can't occur by small changes, because they aren't advantageous when not working in that function and have to somehow be heading towards that direction.
