At the University of Copenhagen, Jørn Dyerberg is considered a Living Legend. One wonder if, after this, he’ll be Best Not Mentioned.
Whether proteins can evolve or not will not in the least influence the argument for irreducible complexity. Function cannot evolve gradually.
A friend points out that the paper just describes the intricate machinery of the hook, adding to what we know, without any resort to Darwinspeak. It seems to be getting safer all the time to just not talk that way any more.
Mark Tapscott at HillFaith (for Congressional staff): “Life Is Simply Impossible Without This ‘Irreducibly Complex’ ATP Generator, So How Did It Get Here?”
We see devolution all the time with unintelligent causes. Animals gnaw a hole in the bottom of a jug of water and they get some water but the rest is wasted. They destroy the feedhouse door trying to get into the feed because they don’t know how to use the doorhandle. They do get fed but the feed is scattered and much is wasted. *That’s what an unintelligent cause is typically like.* Put another way, the animals won’t learn to use the doorhandle or the jug cap. But just to survive and reproduce, they might not need to.
Marcos Eberlin: Maybe one could grant the evolutionary miracle a single time, but six times?
Using, as an illustration, a toy familiar to those who have spent time with small infants.
Access Research Network is offering a $50 Visa voucher for the best answer.
Congrats to Philip Cunningham
Here’s an example of what Michael Behe is (actually) talking about in Darwin Devolves The evolution strategy “Break or blunt any functional coded element whose loss would yield a net fitness gain”: Eleven authors writing in PLOS Biology found that “γ-proteobacteria eject their polar flagella under nutrient depletion, retaining flagellar motor relic structures.” When there’s Read More…
Davies, author of The Demon in the Machine: How Hidden Webs of Information Are Finally Solving the Mystery of Life thinks we overlook the difficulty and offers a solution: Nature got there first.
Or here. Note: Behe has a new book coming out. See New book from Michael Behe on how today’s DNA findings “devolve” Darwin See also: The bombardier beetle, the toad, and – after all these years – Mike Behe
Ever since Michael Behe published Darwin’s Black Box in 1996, the concept of irreducible complexity has played a central role in the debate over Darwinian theory. I am proposing a new, theoretical method of determining whether a system is irreducibly complex using power-sets. First, however, it is necessary to define irreducible complexity. Various definitions of irreducible Read More…
Some things can’t change. From a piece at ENST, A Classic Evolutionist’s Error, Berra’s Blunder Revs Up Again Tim Berra had tried to compare biological evolution to the evolution of the Corvette. In his book Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds, Johnson aptly pointed out the intuitively obvious difference: Of course, every one of those Corvettes Read More…
From Phys.org: Many bacteria are equipped with a flagellum, a helical propeller that allows bacteria to travel. The flagellum is assembled in a highly organized manner involving the stepwise addition of each of its internal parts. However, there are many open questions as to how this orderly construction is achieved. In a study published in Read More…