The "intelligent design" hypothesis has repeatedly tried to hold up examples of irreducible complexity as signatures of a sentient, and necessarily divine creator.
One thing they repeatedly fail to take into consideration is that the precursors of the traits they look at may have evolved for other purposes than the present. The bacterium flagella held up by Michael Behe is afaik the latest example of just that. In many organisms, however, one finds the molecular components that make up the flagella applied for other purposes, and the combination of the components isn't as big a step up as Behe argues. Another thing they don't consider is that an organ can have an evolutionary advantage in simpler forms than the present. The mammalian eye used to be a favourite example; that if you took away any of the parts of the eye it wouldn't work, and ipso facto it must have been created, not evolved. Not so, because even the most primitive photoreceptors would give an advantage to those who posessed them over those who didn't. In addition, there is the fact that there are many different eye constructions out there, all quite advanced in today's organisms. The insect/arthropod eye with all its facets, the vertebrate eyes (quite different between fish and say, whales, but still sharing many anatomical features). Arguably, the most advanced eye belongs not to a vertrabrate, but to an octopus. For example, the octopus eye does not have a blind spot like all vertebrate eyes have. Ultimately, the concept of a designer also begs the question of who designed the designer. Jostein Michael Behe is another die-hard in that camp, but 2007/6/14, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Noted British Astonomer Fred Hoyle wrote (note I'm using this as an example > of a noted and respected scientist, not that I agree with everything he says > or that he's always correct... who is?) > > "if one proceeds directly and straightforwardly in this matter, without > being deflected by a fear of incurring the wrath of scientific opinion, one > arrives at the conclusion that biomaterials with their amazing measure or > order must be the outcome of intelligent design." > > Hoyle calculated that the chance of obtaining the required set of enzymes > for even the simplest living cell was one in 10 *40,000 power. Since the > number of atoms in the known universe is infinitesimally tiny by comparison > (10 *80 power), he argued that even a whole universe full of primordial soup > wouldn't have a chance. He claimed: The notion that not only the biopolymer > but the operating program of a living cell could be arrived at by chance in > a primordial organic soup here on the Earth is evidently nonsense of a high > order. > > Hoyle compared the random emergence of even the simplest cell to the > likelihood that "a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a > Boeing 747 from the materials therein." Hoyle also compared the chance of > obtaining even a single functioning protein by chance combination of amino > acids to a solar system full of blind men solving Rubik's Cube > simultaneously. > > > > Tom C. > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > -- http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ http://alunfoto.blogspot.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
