Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Mechanical gear found in living organism — Behe’s IC still a challenge for Darwinism

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

First gear discovered

insect gear

With two diminutive legs locked into a leap-ready position, the tiny jumper bends its body taut like an archer drawing a bow. At the top of its legs, a minuscule pair of gears engage—their strange, shark-fin teeth interlocking cleanly like a zipper. And then, faster than you can blink, think, or see with the naked eye, the entire thing is gone. In 2 milliseconds it has bulleted skyward, accelerating at nearly 400 g’s—a rate more than 20 times what a human body can withstand. At top speed the jumper breaks 8 mph—quite a feat considering its body is less than one-tenth of an inch long.

This miniature marvel is an adolescent issus, a kind of planthopper insect and one of the fastest accelerators in the animal kingdom. As a duo of researchers in the U.K. report today in the journal Science, the issus also the first living creature ever discovered to sport a functioning gear.

Read more: The First Gear Discovered in Nature – Popular Mechanics
Follow us: @PopMech on Twitter | popularmechanics on Facebook
Visit us at PopularMechanics.com

How does selection arrive at such coordination? What good is one gear without the corresponding gear? The challenge of IC for Darwinism remains.

HT: friend from e-mail

Comments
Lizzie: I don’t see anything irreducibly complex about this, ... Of course you don't. Do you think that gears could work without teeth and groves?Joe
September 13, 2013
September
09
Sep
13
13
2013
08:50 AM
8
08
50
AM
PDT
I don't see anything irreducibly complex about this, although it is certainly wonderful.Elizabeth B Liddle
September 13, 2013
September
09
Sep
13
13
2013
08:34 AM
8
08
34
AM
PDT
Thanks, Sal, for the picture and link. Maybe this picture should be included at the top of the UD page, along side the flagellum picture.Granville Sewell
September 13, 2013
September
09
Sep
13
13
2013
07:02 AM
7
07
02
AM
PDT
AVS: Typical ideological dismissal, sorry you don't get to play the default game, as every tub must stand on its own bottom. A gear actually aptly illustrates the FIVE challenges an IC object poses for the darwinist gradualist claim, as there is a requirement of meshing and tooth-strength with axes that have to be carefully o-ordinated as well. Just ask anyone who has had to design and machine a set of gears. Let's list these challenges C1 - 5, from Menuge:
For a working [bacterial] flagellum to be built by exaptation, the five following conditions would all have to be met: C1: Availability. Among the parts available for recruitment to form the flagellum, there would need to be ones capable of performing the highly specialized tasks of paddle, rotor, and motor, even though all of these items serve some other function or no function. C2: Synchronization. The availability of these parts would have to be synchronized so that at some point, either individually or in combination, they are all available at the same time. C3: Localization. The selected parts must all be made available at the same ‘construction site,’ perhaps not simultaneously but certainly at the time they are needed. C4: Coordination. The parts must be coordinated in just the right way: even if all of the parts of a flagellum are available at the right time, it is clear that the majority of ways of assembling them will be non-functional or irrelevant. C5: Interface compatibility. The parts must be mutually compatible, that is, ‘well-matched’ and capable of properly ‘interacting’: even if a paddle, rotor, and motor are put together in the right order, they also need to interface correctly. ( Agents Under Fire: Materialism and the Rationality of Science, pgs. 104-105 (Rowman & Littlefield, 2004). HT: ENV.)
(Cf. more at 101 level here, not that I expect much from a side of discussion that has a tendency to argue in circles, assume default, spin just so stories not backed up by adequate empirical evidence but driven by the presuppositions of evolutionary materialist ideology and then pin any slightest thing that can be seen as confirmatory to the eye of Darwinist faith -- as in massive confirmation bias, deny or dismiss actual self evident truths [e.g. first principles of right reason] -- not realising that this alone exposes utter irrationality, and pretend that it does not need to actually show per observation that its claimed dynamics have the powers claimed. By sharp contrast, IC systems are a subset of FSCO/I and we have billions of cases worth of evidence that FSCO/I has only been observed to come from design. Where also the implications of needing multiple well matched parts locks us down to isolated clusters of configs in a space of possibilities that overwhelms the blind search capacity of the solar system or observed cosmos. So, we have every good reason to see that irreducibly complex systems, among other cases of FSCO/I, strongly point to design as empirically warranted best causal explanation. KFkairosfocus
September 13, 2013
September
09
Sep
13
13
2013
04:47 AM
4
04
47
AM
PDT
AVS:
IC is not a challenge and it never was.
Right, because people like you just handwave it away. You sure as hell don't have any evidence that unguided processes can construct a multi-protein complex.Joe
September 13, 2013
September
09
Sep
13
13
2013
04:13 AM
4
04
13
AM
PDT
Of related note: Evolution vs. The Honey Bee - an Architectural Marvel - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4181791bornagain77
September 13, 2013
September
09
Sep
13
13
2013
01:59 AM
1
01
59
AM
PDT
Sal. Off topic... look here... this will probably pop up in Darwin's Doubt discussions soon. Forward to Meyer. Will be interesting to hear him respond: http://www.sciencerecorder.com/news/scientists-big-bang-of-life-eons-ago-fits-theory-of-evolution/JGuy
September 13, 2013
September
09
Sep
13
13
2013
01:29 AM
1
01
29
AM
PDT
IC is not a challenge and it never was. Who are you guys kidding?
Darwinism is a metaphysical myth, not science. Who are you kidding?cantor
September 12, 2013
September
09
Sep
12
12
2013
10:20 PM
10
10
20
PM
PDT
IC is not a challenge and it never was. Who are you guys kidding?AVS
September 12, 2013
September
09
Sep
12
12
2013
10:02 PM
10
10
02
PM
PDT
http://www.pnas.org/content/101/38/13697.shortJGuy
September 12, 2013
September
09
Sep
12
12
2013
09:50 PM
9
09
50
PM
PDT
"Paley’s Watch Found in Bacteria" http://creationsafaris.com/crev200810.htm#20081031a "Rotary Clock Discovered in Bacteria" http://creationsafaris.com/crev200505.htm#cell237 "Peering Into Paley’s Black Box: The Gears of the Biological Clock" http://creationsafaris.com/crev200409.htm#cell209JGuy
September 12, 2013
September
09
Sep
12
12
2013
09:48 PM
9
09
48
PM
PDT
"A nano-gear in a nano-motor inside you" http://phys.org/news/2013-01-nano-gear-nano-motor.htmlJGuy
September 12, 2013
September
09
Sep
12
12
2013
09:43 PM
9
09
43
PM
PDT
...or maybe not. BTW: I think there is one other gear that has been found in life. So, the source for this article might actually be one off.JGuy
September 12, 2013
September
09
Sep
12
12
2013
09:37 PM
9
09
37
PM
PDT
You see , it all starts with the first primitive cog, which was probably a vestigial tooth... :-PJGuy
September 12, 2013
September
09
Sep
12
12
2013
09:35 PM
9
09
35
PM
PDT
Once again, the more we discover about biology, the more the evidence points to a designer. ;-)Blue_Savannah
September 12, 2013
September
09
Sep
12
12
2013
09:22 PM
9
09
22
PM
PDT
1 2 3

Leave a Reply